No they aren't....
Despite the best antics on the conservative side of the aisle, unions are an essential part of the overwhelming majority of Americans. If you're working your 40 hour a week job, most of the labor protections came as a result of unions. You can try to deny it - but if you work 40 hours and get paid overtime for working over 40 hours ... you can thank unions for that. Grateful to have weekends off? Thank the unions. Benefits? Health care? Vacation time? Pensions? Unions paved the way for all of us.
"But do we still need them?"
Yes we do. Think about it for a moment. Do CEOs have a responsibility to shareholders or their employees? Let me rephrase the question better - what do CEOs have a higher level of responsibility to?
Ahhh yes - the power of the mighty shareholder.
It's the fall back answer for nearly 90 percent of conservatives who believe that unions are the bad guy ... while major corporations continue to reel off profits every quarter. The shareholder has a vested interest - but so does the American worker. The problem is - the shareholder has a vote - a say - in what happens with the company. The employee doesn't. If you don't like it - there's the door.
Unions level the playing field for the American worker.
Furthermore there's legislative action that want to roll back employment protections for workers. Make it easier to hire children because their labor is cheaper. Make it easier to force workers to work over 40 hours a week without compensation ... and even slashing benefits and vacation time because "the company needs this sacrifice."
"But unions milk money and cost companies a lot of money."
So do CEOs, CFOs, boards and other executives who continually line their golden parachutes ... for themselves ... rather than the much SMALLER piece of the pie that unions "milk" from their members or from companies. It's hard to call the kettle black when watching a $400 million payout with stock and other benefits being laid out for someone who drove a company into the ground.
Sorry - you're not going to get much sympathy from me.
"But it's socialism!"
The ever infamous last resort of conservatives who really don't understand exactly what socialism is. We are as close to socialism as I am from dancing as a ballerina in Swan Lake. "But it's the start of the slope!" .... no it's not. Everything in life can't be run on a purely capitalist, anti-union system.
But instead of being satisfied with something in the middle, unions are crumbling right and left. If you look at the amount of unions around today ... in comparison to the last 50-100 years ... you'd understand that it's a fallacy that "unions are destroying America!"
The greed-fest and Corporatocracy this nation has been enduring since the Reagan years is the lone culprit. Even as unions continue to represent less of the American work force, companies and corporations continue to exploit agreements that take jobs out of the country. That's why there are shoe plants in Taiwan that employ young kids in sweat shops. The Republican party has become whores for corporations and companies ... thoroughly unable or unwilling to do the right thing for their constituents because they believe their constituents are companies and corporations .... not American people.
"Obama is just as bad as Republicans when it comes to this."
Could actually be a fair point - but Obama knows that no matter how idealistic he was when he took office ... the Republicans were going to drag their heels on every single piece of legislation. So Obama knows he has imperfect legislation - but it's better than no legislation at all.
Look in the details. Look who benefits. Look who gains. Look who wins.
It's not the union you should worry about. It's that corporate fat cat dolling out hundred dollar bills to the whores he pays for. That's who's destroying America...
Friday, February 24, 2012
Monday, February 20, 2012
Loss is Loss
The recent death of Whitney Houston has brought out the ire in a lot of folks that say that there's people dying all the time overseas and they aren't celebrated as much as Whitney has been.
Very fair point.
Loss is loss. Whether we know that sergeant who has a family of 4 or the singer whose life was curtailed by drugs or other substances - both people leave behind a following of folks that are affected. Granted, the sergeant won't get the accolades or constant banner headlines as much as Whitney did, but I'd argue that the families of the sergeant wouldn't want that during their time of grief anyway.
So while I understand the arguments from both sides - we have two people gone from our collective lives. I don't have to know the sergeant to bereave his loss or the loss to his family. I don't have to know Whitney or the tabloid-esque story she lived to bereave her loss to an industry as an entertainer.
Now...
For those that say that I have no right or claim to feel sad for Whitney's passing because "you never knew her" - well those folks lead a very narrow view in life. I'm not about to tell someone how or under which circumstances by which they should or shouldn't grieve. Who am I to say what affects a person? Just because I hadn't personally shook the hands of the deceased doesn't mean I shouldn't be sad or affected by their passing.
Grief is personal. How I choose to grieve or not grieve is my personal decision as it is yours. Grieving is a natural part of life because all things eventually pass on. So instead of building up walls or processes that doesn't allow those emotions to be absorbed ... we grieve because we embrace life and those who we have allowed into our lives.
Very fair point.
Loss is loss. Whether we know that sergeant who has a family of 4 or the singer whose life was curtailed by drugs or other substances - both people leave behind a following of folks that are affected. Granted, the sergeant won't get the accolades or constant banner headlines as much as Whitney did, but I'd argue that the families of the sergeant wouldn't want that during their time of grief anyway.
So while I understand the arguments from both sides - we have two people gone from our collective lives. I don't have to know the sergeant to bereave his loss or the loss to his family. I don't have to know Whitney or the tabloid-esque story she lived to bereave her loss to an industry as an entertainer.
Now...
For those that say that I have no right or claim to feel sad for Whitney's passing because "you never knew her" - well those folks lead a very narrow view in life. I'm not about to tell someone how or under which circumstances by which they should or shouldn't grieve. Who am I to say what affects a person? Just because I hadn't personally shook the hands of the deceased doesn't mean I shouldn't be sad or affected by their passing.
Grief is personal. How I choose to grieve or not grieve is my personal decision as it is yours. Grieving is a natural part of life because all things eventually pass on. So instead of building up walls or processes that doesn't allow those emotions to be absorbed ... we grieve because we embrace life and those who we have allowed into our lives.
Sunday, February 12, 2012
Christian Hypocrisy?
...is alive and well....
I don't mean to knock all Christians, but if you're going to throw your weight behind a candidate that demeans the poor or supports big business or doesn't think there's a problem of denying healthcare to those who need it ... then you need to reflect on this a bit.
Christianity isn't a get into heaven free card. If you're going to be moral in your life, then it just doesn't stop after you leave church every Sunday.
HP: Christianity? Really?
A post on HP about a blogger that is being sent back home to face the death penalty got my attention. One of the comments was from some person who thinks we should be grateful that we live in a Christian country. Of course - I took exception to that....
A Christian country that promotes immoral prejudices against recognizable groups in the populace?
A Christian country that advocates a woman's right to choose is negated because it violates the beliefs of the Christian's book of following?
A Christian country that adamantly defends the birth of unborn babies while delivering potentially innocent people to the gas chamber?
A Christian country that rigorously defends the acquisition of wealth while stripping the benefits from those who need it?
A Christian country that routinely practices theological prejudice against other faiths when this country was founded on the principle of freedom to practice whatever religion you wanted?
A Christian country who has tangent cults who continue to picket the funerals of our bravest -- who use the Christian book of following to defend their incredibly immoral, unpatriotic behavior?
Is THIS the Christian country you speak of?
A Christian country that promotes immoral prejudices against recognizable groups in the populace?
A Christian country that advocates a woman's right to choose is negated because it violates the beliefs of the Christian's book of following?
A Christian country that adamantly defends the birth of unborn babies while delivering potentially innocent people to the gas chamber?
A Christian country that rigorously defends the acquisition of wealth while stripping the benefits from those who need it?
A Christian country that routinely practices theological prejudice against other faiths when this country was founded on the principle of freedom to practice whatever religion you wanted?
A Christian country who has tangent cults who continue to picket the funerals of our bravest -- who use the Christian book of following to defend their incredibly immoral, unpatriotic behavior?
Is THIS the Christian country you speak of?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)