Your voice, Unions, and Politics

know1

Drowned Out wrote:

Would there not be a trickle-up effect into politics if workers fought for more power within the companies they work for?

If so many people see the government as being influenced more by corporate interests and lobby groups than by popular opinion.....Wouldn't a more organized workforce bring the current system at least a little more in line with peoples' beliefs?

By making smaller-scale democratic decisions within the company structure, before that corporate influence (money) is used (donated), we could gain more control over the companies that have control over the government....

Under the capitalist/socialist mutt of a system we are living under, is there a better alternative to have our voices heard than thru unions and worker solidarity?

No. Absolutely NO to all questions asked. Unions are a big part of the problems industry is having now in the U.S.

For their own good, unions need to get out of the way now or face the fact that they are going to be the direct cause of their own demise - and the transfer of their jobs elsewhere.

ccRyderzz

Drowned Out wrote:

Would there not be a trickle-up effect into politics if workers fought for more power within the companies they work for?

If so many people see the government as being influenced more by corporate interests and lobby groups than by popular opinion.....Wouldn't a more organized workforce bring the current system at least a little more in line with peoples' beliefs?

By making smaller-scale democratic decisions within the company structure, before that corporate influence (money) is used (donated), we could gain more control over the companies that have control over the government....

Under the capitalist/socialist mutt of a system we are living under, is there a better alternative to have our voices heard than thru unions and worker solidarity?

All of a sudden, boom, it's a narcotic and it's outlawed by FDA. What
is the initial response of all these grey-haired fathers of psychiatry
to making LSD an illegal substance? Protest, it's a bad thing, it's
robbing us of a powerful psychotherapeutic agent, it's crippling our
research efforts. These guys were hung out to dry. They were used by
Intelligence Agencies to gather therapeutic use of LSD, interrogation
use of LSD, psychotomenitic (sp) use of LSD and then when they had done
their job, LSD was just cancelled from academia. It was made illegal,
and then a whole disinformation campaign went along with that whereby
LSD was transformed from this wonderful therapeutic agent whose use was
advocated by the major leading figures in psychiatry into this horrible
thing that made children jump out of windows and bust up their
chromosomes. It's called a "disinformation campaign". And it caught the
leaders of psychiatry totally by su rprise, which is hard to believe
since psychiatrists are such clever political strategists in general.
What about this whole creating Manchurian Candidate stuff which we see
now for a fact has been going on since WWII? And according to
Estabrooks, even back to WWI? We now have established for a proven fact
that was going on during WWII, and the CIA was working on it in
Artichoke and Bluebird from 1951-53. The Korean War only started in
1950. The disinformation was that our boys went overseas there, they
got shot down, they got captured, the Communist Chinese worked on them
with these strange techniques we don't understand. The person who coined
the term "brainwashing" in a book was Edwin Hunter. He's a career CIA
officer. This was a term coined by the CIA to explain what was happening
to our boys in North Korea who were making bold statements about germ
warfare activities they had been involved in. Now it could be that part
of the Communist brainwashing strategy was to talk to these guys about
the ethical improprieties of biological warfare and bombing they
actually had been doing in North Korea. In any rate, they come home as
Manchurian Candidates. We are all bent out of shape because our boys are
talking Communism, so we say that we have got to start studying this
reactively and defensively because of what the Commies are doing. That
is the disinformation myth that has been adhered to by the Military
Intelligence community steadfastly from the Korean War to the present.
It's totally bullshit. It's disinformation. It's not a fact. It's a
made up story to cover up the fact that actually we had operational
offensive use of this psychological warfare technology already in place
in WWII. We have a major disinformation campaign which has basically
fooled mental health professions and the general public concerning
brainwashing, concerning LSD. Fortunately those are the only two
examples in human history. This analysis does not apply to the False
Memory movement. There is no way it could conceivably be possible, you
will all agree, that there could be any nervousness in the Intelligence
Community about Manchurian Candidates spilling out into civilian
psychotherapies and that a disinformation program based on False
Memories would be required. It is obviously absurd. Nobody but a CIA
conspiracy nut would ever suggest that. I guarantee you that that
thought has never even crossed my mind until it just spontaneously
appeared at this moment. So you see, actually, in fact, the idea that
there could be a deliberate disinformation campaign element to the False
Memory movement is perfectly plausible, consistent with history, and
could be expected. There is bound to be some sort of disinformation
strategy if in fact Manchurian Candidates have been leaking out into
civilian psychotherapy. So here we have, with all of this
documentation, all of this proof ... we know that it is perfectly
possible that people we are seeing in therapy who are claiming to be
victims of systematic military mind control experimentation are telling
us about what actually happened to them. However, I am not a single
step further ahead than I was four years ago on actually documenting
that any single patient in treatment actually in fact was involved in
these mind control experiments. There is no linkage at all from the
current patients in treatment to this documentation. So whether we are
ever going to get that or not, I don't know. (From audience: Mind
Control and the Military can be found on America On-Line on the internet
- "On Psych"-and there are websites). Apparently there is a lot of
information about this on the web and on internet and AOl and elsewhere.
But the problem is, I don't go to chat rooms very often, but most of it
is totally banal, and silly and boring and a waste of time. So when you
go into the stuff on mind control, how much is garbage that you are
going to get, and how much is solid stuff that you can pursue and
document are you going to get is my question. I have no idea what the
answer is. But, as we all know, the truth is out there. (From the
audience: "how would I go about documenting that a patient I, or
somebody else, currently has in treatment, in fact was involved in that
kind of experimentation?") Well, here's how the documentation has gone
so far. By the way, I have done Freedom of Information Act requests on
MONARCH at all Intelligence Agencies, and they have all denied it
exists. The patient apparently has no source of contamination for
specific MONARCH memories, but has the word Monarch in her mind, and has
very specific detailed Monarch-type mind control memories. Her father
basically abused her domestically and ritualistically, and then took her
over to the mind control people. How she got there, what the transport
mechanism was .. plane, car, location is all vague because she appears
to have been all drugged out then transported. Is it possible that her
father could have been this kind of person? Well, I have his military
service records which I got through the Freedom of Informatiion Act, I
have a lette r from him in prison where he is imprisoned for mob crime
connections, I've got a mother and a sister corroborating the domestic
incest, the sister with some patchy corroboration of ritualistic and
mind control memories, I've got the father personally connected to Jack
Ruby. That's as far as it goes. It's sort of circumstantial and
intriguing. So the way I would attempt to document it would be if the
person tells me (most people can't tell you the specific name of the
doctor) but if somebody gives you a specific name of a doctor, and gives
you a specific location, and you can establish that this doctor actually
existed, and you can establish that in fact this doctor was a CIA
employee, and you can establish that this person's father was imprisoned
by the FBI as part of a Mafia raid by looking at the journal articles
that the patient has, then you are starting to get closer and closer. So
it is your basic investigative reporting type stuff. Name the specific
base. Okay what do yo u know about the base? How did you get there?
Tell me about some buildings? Tell me about personnel. Describe the
uniforms. What was used? And then if you can get another subject who
was there at the same time ... that's just the way it is. It is your
basic investigative reporting. Which is way beyond being a therapist.
There is no therapeutic obligation to do this. This is mega beyond duty
to take collateral history. So I don't think there is any mystery as to
how it would proceed. And it will proceed probably in the same way as
the history of declassified information since WWII. In about, I think
1988, stuff was released to the Senate and the Congress and then to the
Press about all these radiation experiments. Nobody did anything. It
didn't even get into the newspapers. It was in the public domain for
five years before it finally hits the newspapers. Now we've got this
government report that is 900 pages long on all the radiation
experiments, including giving radiation to children and radiation to
pregnant mothers and the children of those pregnancies dying of leukemia
by age five. This is huge, big stuff. Everybody was apathetic, didn't
think it was newsworthy, didn 't even put it as a little trailer item in
the New York Ti mes. This is no longer vague. We know the specific
names of people, when they died, whether it was plutonium or whatever
was injected, the names of the doctors, the names of the medical schools
where it was done, it's all keyed up for compensation, the government
has set up a whole compensation mechanism. If we look at the Tuscagee
Syphilis Study ... it is worse than the creation of Manchurian
Candidates. It was set up in Tuscagee, Alabama in the 1940's. The
experiment is-you've got 400 rural, dirt-poor black guys with active
syphilis and 400 controls. These people are followed without treatment
into the 1970's. The people who are involved in the Tuscagee Syphilis
Study (it is a huge long list and I can't remember all the details of
it) but it includes the County Medical Society, the administration of
the study was actually taken over by the Centre of Disease Control, the
Surgeon General, the American Heart Association, all kinds of people
were witting, knowledgeable and awar e of the study and ap proved its
ongoing nature well into the 60's and into the 70's, in complete
violation of all known medical ethics. Well okay, that was kept kind of
secret. Nobody heard about it except some of these medical bigwigs. No.
I have a medical paper from the medical school published in 1965 called
"Untreated Syphilis in a Male Negro - A 20 year follow-up". This stuff
is published, right in the medical literature. It is looking everybody
right in the face. What happens when you have 400 illiterate rural
black guys with active syphilis untreated, for 40 years? Well, the
outcome of the experiment is, you will be very surprised to hear, they
don't do too well, they develop a lot of disease, and they die young.
They do another thing. They breathe air. There is another behaviour
that we can predict in these guys. They eat food. Going down the list?
They urinate and defecate. Continuing along with basic human functions,
they have sexual intercourse with women. Anybody who has been to medical
school will tell you it is 100% guaranteed that if you take 400 black
guys with syphil is and do not treat them, the rest of t heir lives, you
are guaranteed to be creating cases of congenital syphilis. The entire
medical community knows this as an elementary fact that you learn in
first year medical school, it is published in the medical literature,
and it's condoned by all levels of the old boys network in world
medicine. This is totally unbelievable and completely factual. This
Manchurian Candidate stuff is like Mickey Mouse Psych stuff. It's not
even heavy duty. The nurse who was the head of the Tuscagee Syphilis
study throughout its duration, actually got an award from the Public
Health Service because of her work on the Tuscagee Syphilis Study. The
individual guys have gone and testified at the Senate. You can read the
book, "Bad Blood" and these guys are named as individual human beings.
Which individual human beings who are victims of military mind control
research do we already know? Harold Blauer, the tennis pro who was
killed. Frank Olson who was killed because he jumped through a window
because he took LSD mixed with Cointro by Sidney Gottlieb

Kel Varnsen

Commy wrote:

Uder the current system. On a more realistic scale, labor would be payed far more.

I worked with 20 other guys for 2 years in a restaraunt in Seattle. Our labor was the reason the business existed, and we worked our asses off, every fucking day. The company that owned the restaraunt made $13 million that year. I made $12 an hour.

Think about that on a global scale. Why are a few individuals benefiting from the labor of the majority? A small group of individuals are reaping the rewards of labor-we are being exploited. And people defend that-out of patriotism, out of fear, out of fear of change-the world doesn't have to be this way.

Twelve bucks an hours seems like a pretty good wage for working in a restaurant. I mean yes you worked hard but unless you are the head chef, it is not like most positions in a restaurant are really that difficult. Plus most people working in restaurants get tips. I am curious how much do you think you should have been getting paid.

I honestly think unions have served their purpose. There are labour laws in place to protect workers from being totally screwed. Now unions seem to be just in it for the money (theirs and as a side benefit their employees). Plus a lot of times their hard line attitudes mean less jobs. Plus I bet there is as much corruption in unions as there is in any corporation, if not more.

SundaySilence

On average union workers make about 30% more than their non-union counterparts working in similar occupations.

ccRyderzz

NO. 17601
DEBRA ANN DIRKS, DENISE LEE DIRKS, VONNIE LYNN DIRKS, and
GERALD EDWARD DIRKS, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. NORMAN T.
BROOKS, Defendant, and BEVERLY H. BROOKS,
Intervenor-Appellant
(By: Burns, C.J., Watanabe, and Lim, JJ.)

In this appeal, Intervenor-Appellant Beverly H. Brooks (Beverly or
Intervenor) challenges the October 7, 1993 Findings of Fact and Conclusions
of Law; Order (the 1993 Order), issued by the Circuit Court of the Second
Circuit (the circuit court), Judge E. John McConnell presiding, denying
Beverly's December 17, 1991 Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief.
We affirm.On September 6, 1979, John L. Franklin, Personal Representative of
Estate of Roy L. Dirks, Deceased (Dirks) (1)
filed a Complaint in the circuit court to domesticate an Oregon wrongful
death judgment against Defendant-Appellant Norman T. Brooks (Norman or
Defendant). On September 7, 1979, Dirks filed a Motion for Preliminary
Injunction to enjoin Norman, during the pendency of the lawsuit, "from
selling, leasing, assigning or in anyway [sic] alienating his interest in
the real property located at tax map key number 2-8-005-102" (the Maui
property). The recorded deed for the Maui property reflected that Norman
owned the Maui property with Beverly as joint tenants with the right of
survivorship.
On August 7, 1981, Dirks moved for judgment on the pleadings. On October 21,
1981, the circuit court, Judge Kase Higa presiding, entered: (1) an Order
Granting [Dirks'] Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings, which noted that
Norman did not appear at the hearing on the motion; (2) a Judgment for Dirks
and against Norman for $1,200,000.00, the amount claimed by Dirks, as well
as interest, costs, and attorney fees totaling $227,209.20; and (3) a Notice
of Entry of Order or Judgment. (2)

On July 12, 1991, new counsel entered an appearance for Dirks, whose prior
counsel had died. The same day, an Execution of the October 21, 1981
Judgment was filed in the circuit court, commanding the sheriff or deputy
sheriff of the State of Hawai`i to levy upon Norman's Maui property. On
August 26, 1991, a deputy sheriff filed a Notice of Execution, certifying
that he had levied upon all of the right, title and interest of Norman in
the Maui property.

On August 30, 1991, Dirks filed an ex parte motion to revive the October 21,
1981 Judgment against Norman, on grounds that no part of the judgment had
yet been paid or satisfied. An order granting the motion was entered on
August 30, 1991.

On November 29, 1991, Beverly filed a Motion for Leave to Intervene as a
party to the action against Norman and be allowed to file a complaint
seeking declaratory judgment "that [Beverly] is the equitable and sole owner
of [the Maui property] and directing reformation of the deed to reflect sole
ownership by [Beverly.]"

Beverly's Motion for Leave to Intervene was granted on January 2, 1992.

Following a July 12, 1993 bench trial, the circuit court, on October 7,
1993, issued the 1993 Order, denying Beverly's proposed declaratory judgment
and reformation of deed.

The 1993 Order explained in detail the background of the case and the
circuit court's reasoning for denying Beverly's order:

FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

This matter came on for non-jury trial on July 12, 1993, before the
HONORABLE E. JOHN McCONNELL, presiding, upon the action of the Intervenor,
BEVERLY BROOKS, for a declaratory judgment that she is the sole legal and
equitable owner of certain improved real property and for reformation of a
recorded deed concerning that property. Attorney Carolyn Burton appeared on
behalf of the Intervenor, BEVERLY BROOKS ("Intervenor"), and the Defendant,
NORMAN T. BROOKS ("Defendant"), both of whom were present in court
throughout the trial. Attorneys Steven Guttman and Ronald S. Adelman
appeared on behalf of the Plaintiff, JOHN L. FRANKLIN ("Plaintiff"). The
[c]ourt having heard and considered the oral and documentary evidence
received at trial, the stipulations of the parties, the issues raised by the
pleadings, and the arguments of counsel; and the [c]ourt being fully advised
in the premises, and good cause appearing therefor, the [c]ourt hereby makes
the following findings of fact and conclusions of law:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. The Intervenor, an educated woman now aged 64, has continuously since
August of 1978 cohabitated with the Defendant, now aged 50, at improved real
property located at 120 Waonehele Place, Haiku, Maui, Hawaii 96708, bearing
TMK 12-2-8-005-102 ("the subject property").
The Intervenor first met the Defendant in Oregon in 1973 through the
Intervenor's daughter, Maureen, who was then living with the Defendant. At
that time, the Intervenor was married to Dr. Robert Daugherty, and her legal
name was Beverly Felice Benton Daugherty. The Intervenor had been married
Dr. Daugherty since 1946, and they had four children, all daughters.
From 1973 to 1975, the Intervenor visited with the Defendant and her
daughter Maureen at least once per month. On July 1, 1975, the Intervenor
separated from her husband and moved in with the Defendant's family. At that
time, the Defendant was the father of three natural children and three
adopted children ("the Defendant's children"). The Intervenor filed a
divorce action against her husband. She engaged the services of an attorney
to handle the divorce. She was granted a final decree of divorce in January
of 1976, and received a property settlement which included the payment to
her of $300,000.00 cash by her ex-husband in December of 1975.
In 1975, the Plaintiff filed a wrongful death action in Oregon against
the Defendant and others concerning the shooting death of deputy sheriff Roy
L. Dirks.
In 1975, in a separate criminal proceeding, the Defendant was convicted
and incarcerated in the Oregon State Penitentiary, and served three years,
from August, 1975, until he was released in August, 1978.
On August 13, 1975, the Intervenor had her name legally changed in
Oregon to Beverly Happy Brooks. She engaged the services of an attorney to
handle the change of name. The Intervenor testified that the name change
signified her commitment to the Defendant as a life partner, made her a
member of the Norman T. Brooks family, and meant that she had become the
godmother to the Defendant's children. The Intervenor's daughter, Maureen,
had her name legally changed to Marry Brooks.
In January or early February of 1976, the Intervenor and the Defendant
agreed that the entire Brooks family should be moved out of Oregon, the
Defendant to join them upon his release from prison. They further agreed
that the Intervenor would provide the funds to purchase property for the
family home. The Defendant, as head of the family, preferred moving the
family to Texas. The Intervenor, who had visited Maui several times since
1973, preferred moving the family to Maui. The Intervenor prevailed.
In February of 1976, the Intervenor went to Maui to look for property
to purchase. She carried with her $150,000 in cash in a briefcase for the
purpose of using it to purchase land on Maui. She contacted a local realtor,
Harry Holt, who showed her several properties, none of which she found
acceptable. On her own, without a realtor, she found the subject property,
called the telephone number on a posted for sale sign, and, on or about
February 26, 1976, contracted to purchase the unimproved property from the
owners, Dr. and Mrs. Pfaeltzer, for $100,000.
It was the Intervenor's intention to purchase the land jointly with
Defendant with rights of survivorship, thereby potentially benefitting her
godchildren upon the death of Intervenor and Defendant. The Intervenor did
not have a legal will. She testified that the realtor, Harry Holt, had told
her that the easiest way to accomplish her intention was to have the
Defendant's name on the deed. However, the Intervenor chose not to have any
realtor or attorney advise or assist her in closing the transaction.
Intervenor went to Security Title Corporation in Wailuku and
opened an escrow. She then met with escrow officer Riki Inciong to work out
the particulars of the transaction. The Intervenor never said anything to
the escrow officer about buying the property to provide for any children, or
about setting up a trust, or about holding the property in trust for any
children.
The Intervenor told the escrow officer that she and the Defendant, who
was in Oregon, were husband and wife. As a result, all of the closing
documents, including the Deed, listed them as husband and wife. Although the
Intervenor and Defendant were not then, and never have been, legally
married, the Intervenor believed that the Defendant was her "life partner"
and felt that their relationship qualified as a marriage under a dictionary
definition. The Intervenor signed the Defendant's name on the closing
documents, including the escrow instructions.
title to real property could be held in Hawaii: tenants by the
entireties, joint tenants, tenants in common, and tenant in severalty. The
Intervenor expressly directed the escrow officer that, in addition to her
name, she wanted the Defendant's name on the deed. The Intervenor decided to
hold title and co-own the property with the Defendant as joint tenants, with
right of survivorship. As a result, all of the closing documents, including
the Deed, listed the Intervenor and the Defendant as joint tenants.
On March 1, 1976, the transaction was closed through escrow, and a
Deed dated March 1, 1976, was recorded with the Bureau of Conveyances, State
of Hawaii, in Liber 11272, Page 321, by which Dr. and Mrs. Pfaeltzer sold to
the Defendant and the Intervenor, as joint tenants, the subject property,
which was fully and legally described in the Deed.
Upon returning to Oregon on March 15, 1976, the Intervenor visited the
Defendant in prison and told him about the subject property, including the
fact that his name was on the title as co-owner. The Intervenor testified
that she spoke with an Oregon attorney named Price about removing the
Defendant's name from the Deed and was told that it could be done. However,
she did not do anything about it, as she did not think it
was important, and that thereafter she procrastinated and never got around
to pursuing the name removal.
In April of 1976, while in Oregon, the Intervenor received a copy of
the recorded Deed from the escrow officer. When the Intervenor received the
Deed, she noted that both her name and the Defendant's were on the Deed,
that they were listed as joint tenants, and that they were listed as being
husband and wife. Thereafter, the Intervenor sent correspondence to the
escrow officer, but none of her correspondence mentioned changing the title
or having the Defendant's name removed from the Deed.
On May 13, 1976, the Defendant signed and sent a letter to the escrow
officer concerning the subject property. Defendant's letter made no mention
of changing the title or having his name removed from the Deed.
On July 30, 1976, at the Oregon State Penitentiary, the Intervenor and
the Defendant both signed, in the presence of a notary public, a document
which granted a utilities easement over the subject property to Maui
Electric Company, Ltd. The easement document listed them as husband and
wife. The easement document was recorded in the Bureau of Conveyances on
September 10, 1976.
During 1976, certain improvements were made to the subject property,
including the construction of a dwelling. The Intervenor paid for these
improvements. The Intervenor testified that the Defendant was the designer
of the property. On or about August 10, 1978, the Defendant was released from prison
and moved to the subject property on Maui with the Intervenor and joined the OUT OF PRISON HE COMMITTED THE MURDER OF THE SHERIFF August 29, 1979, in the Oregon wrongful death case, judgment was
entered in favor of the Plaintiff and against the Defendant ("the Oregon
Judgment"). The Plaintiff was awarded damages totalling $1,200,000 against
the Defendant.
21. On September 6, 1979, the complaint in this case was filed which
sought to domesticate the Oregon Judgment. Following a hearing held on
September 27, 1979, a preliminary injunction was entered in this case on
November 20, 1979, which enjoined the Defendant "during the pendency of this
action from selling, leasing, assigning or in any way alienating his
interest in the real property located at TMK 2-8-005-102." The preliminary
injunction order was recorded with the Bureau of Conveyances on November 20,1970' HOLT OWNED THE PROPERTY A DOCTOR RELATED TO THE IDIOTS IN OREGON
On October 21, 1981, a judgment was entered in this case in favor of
Plaintiff and against Defendant domesticating the Oregon Judgment and
awarding to the Plaintiff damages totalling $1,427,209.20. On August 30,
1991, this judgment was renewed, and the total damages awarded to the
Plaintiff against the Defendant, with accrued interest, increased to
$2,810,624.40. On November 8, 1991, the Intervenor filed her Motion for Intervention
in this case. On December 17, 1991, complaint for declaratory
judgment and injunctive relief.
At all times since the Intervenor had the Defendant's name placed on
the Deed to the subject property on March 1, 1976, up to the date of trial,
she knew that his name remained on the title.
During the period August 1978 to September 1979, when the Intervenor
and the Defendant first cohabited together at the subject property, neither
of them took any action to have the Defendant's name removed from the title
to the BLOOD MONEY At the time that the Plaintiff sought the preliminary injunction
the Defendant in this case in September of 1976, the Intervenor knew
of the Oregon Judgment, knew of the filing of this action, and knew of the
injunctive relief sought by Plaintiff. She admitted at trial that prior to filing her motion for intervention
in 1991, she never engaged a Hawaii attorney to have the Defendant's name
removed from the title.There was no evidence adduced at trial that the Defendant ever engaged
a Hawaii attorney to have his name removed from the title BLOOD MONEY

29. From the time that the Intervenor and the Defendant jointly took title
to the subject property on March 1, 1976, until the Intervenor filed her
Motion for Intervention in this case on November 8, 1991, no action was
taken by either of them to remove the Defendant's name

ccRyderzz

SundaySilence wrote:

On average union workers make about 30% more than their non-union counterparts working in similar occupations.

The front page of the July 10 edition of the "Talkeetna Times" reflected
the town's busy summertime flavor.
A sizeable crowd was expected at the Moose Dropping Festival, where
thousands watch preserved poop dropped on a bull's-eye. Two climbers died on
Mount McKinley, sad news for this, the last civilized stopover before base
camp.

But it was a two-page advertisement from an out-of-state religious group
at the newspaper's center that's still got the town talking.
"LIBERTY OF CONSCIENCE THREATENED," blares a headline above a photograph
of President Bush bowing as he clasps the hand of Pope Benedict XVI. "SUNDAY
WILL BE ENFORCED AS THE MARK OF THE BEAST."

Another photo shows a billboard bearing the words, "Saturday the TRUE
Lord's Day. Changed by Antichrist."

The Florida-based Eternal Gospel Church, a splinter group of the Seventh
Day Adventist Church with a reputation for controversy, bought the ad. It
accuses the Catholic Church of pressing for enforcement of Sunday "blue"
laws regulating moral activities. Seventh Day Adventists believe Saturday is
the Sabbath.

Huh?

ccRyderzz

Commy wrote:

With a loan from a bank making $12 an hour or how would I go about doing that?

The front page of the July 10 edition of the "Talkeetna Times" reflected
the town's busy summertime flavor.
A sizeable crowd was expected at the Moose Dropping Festival, where
thousands watch preserved poop dropped on a bull's-eye. Two climbers died on
Mount McKinley, sad news for this, the last civilized stopover before base
camp.

But it was a two-page advertisement from an out-of-state religious group
at the newspaper's center that's still got the town talking.
"LIBERTY OF CONSCIENCE THREATENED," blares a headline above a photograph
of President Bush bowing as he clasps the hand of Pope Benedict XVI. "SUNDAY
WILL BE ENFORCED AS THE MARK OF THE BEAST."

Another photo shows a billboard bearing the words, "Saturday the TRUE
Lord's Day. Changed by Antichrist."

The Florida-based Eternal Gospel Church, a splinter group of the Seventh
Day Adventist Church with a reputation for controversy, bought the ad. It
accuses the Catholic Church of pressing for enforcement of Sunday "blue"
laws regulating moral activities. Seventh Day Adventists believe Saturday is
the Sabbath.

Huh?

ccRyderzz

wolfbear wrote:

Unions were created out of necessity for the good of the workers in bad and hazardous situations. They definitely served a good purpose but ultimately gained too much control and spawned graft and corruption and had a backlash against them-hence the decline, as well as the move to more white collar jobs.

Workers rights are so defined and protected now, but not in an organized way.
Some of the legislation strangles companies. I'd definitely like to see the workers have more say in the business, and if you look at some very successful companies they do. That should be the model.

I'm not sure what the answer is, but I can see that changes would be good and beneficial to us all.

From Amsterdam Henry Hopehandled the Spanish loan of 1792 when Spain was
fighting against France. WhenHenry Hope moved to London in October 1794 it
was a sign that the end hadcome. Alexander Baring was left to follow in
January 1795. Shortly afterward theDutch Republic collapsed in the face of
the French invasion.
1767-87) and then eighteen to Russia (1788-93). Loan contractors retailed
bondsnot only on the Amsterdam Bourse, but also throughout Europe by way of
theAmsterdam Bourse. Loans were transferred by bills of exchange, and
interest andrepayments were remitted back in the same way.28From Amsterdam
Henry Hope
Age of Secrets - The Conspiracy that Toppled Richard Nixon and the Hidden
Death of Howard Hughes by Gerald Bellett
(notes from the book)

Drowned Out

know1 wrote:

No. Absolutely NO to all questions asked. Unions are a big part of the problems industry is having now in the U.S.

For their own good, unions need to get out of the way now or face the fact that they are going to be the direct cause of their own demise - and the transfer of their jobs elsewhere.

Care to elaborate on how they're a big part of the problem facing industry? If we're talking blue-collar manufacturing (probably the industries most heavily affected by outsourcing), I've always thought of unions as the only people actually fighting to keep those jobs? How is getting out of the way going to help?

Seems funny to me that the rise of Wal-Mart (the biggest, baddest union busters of them all), has coincided with the fall of unions, which has coincided with massive outsourcing of the manufacturing sector....yet unions are to blame?

Kel Varnsen

Drowned Out wrote:

Care to elaborate on how they're a big part of the problem facing industry? If we're talking blue-collar manufacturing (probably the industries most heavily affected by outsourcing), I've always thought of unions as the only people actually fighting to keep those jobs? How is getting out of the way going to help?

Seems funny to me that the rise of Wal-Mart (the biggest, baddest union busters of them all), has coincided with the fall of unions, which has coincided with massive outsourcing of the manufacturing sector....yet unions are to blame?

I think the problems with unions in this case is that they don't seem to realize that there is much more competition for labour than there was in years past. They seem to take such a hard line approach, like pay us this much or we don't work. Back in the old days that tactic would work, but now if they want too much money and they won't work then a big company can much more easily move jobs somewhere where they are cheaper. I think if unions weren't so demanding, especailly since a lot of manufacturing jobs don't require a lot of skills yet get paid really well, companies might be more willing to work with them and let them keep their jobs.

know1

Drowned Out wrote:

Care to elaborate on how they're a big part of the problem facing industry? If we're talking blue-collar manufacturing (probably the industries most heavily affected by outsourcing), I've always thought of unions as the only people actually fighting to keep those jobs? How is getting out of the way going to help?

Seems funny to me that the rise of Wal-Mart (the biggest, baddest union busters of them all), has coincided with the fall of unions, which has coincided with massive outsourcing of the manufacturing sector....yet unions are to blame?

They're inflating the cost of low-skill jobs (and all other union jobs) to the point where the companies basically can't afford to compete globally without sending the jobs elsewhere.

know1

Kel Varnsen wrote:

I think the problems with unions in this case is that they don't seem to realize that there is much more competition for labour than there was in years past. They seem to take such a hard line approach, like pay us this much or we don't work. Back in the old days that tactic would work, but now if they want too much money and they won't work then a big company can much more easily move jobs somewhere where they are cheaper. I think if unions weren't so demanding, especailly since a lot of manufacturing jobs don't require a lot of skills yet get paid really well, companies might be more willing to work with them and let them keep their jobs.

I could have just quoted this as my response.

dmitry

Commy wrote:

yeah. Am I gonna get a loan from a bank to start a restaraunt? I'm guessin no, even 5 years ago, before the economy went to shit. 'Start your own company and pay your employees what you think they're worth' WTF. How does a minimum wage worker go about starting his/her own company? How do I?

"start your own company."
"uhm sure, as soon as I come up with 50 grand I'll get right on that."

It's not like a lender is giving you a business loan and expecting you to make payments on it with your minimum wage job. The business will be your income. Do some quick research on starting a business.

youngster

know1 wrote:

No. Absolutely NO to all questions asked. Unions are a big part of the problems industry is having now in the U.S.

For their own good, unions need to get out of the way now or face the fact that they are going to be the direct cause of their own demise - and the transfer of their jobs elsewhere.

Well, I'm in a union. And I gotta say, you're way off base. How are union workers gonna be a part of their own demise. Nurses, hotel workers, police officers, firefighters construction workers are some of the biggest parts of our society. I am a union constuction worker and, I NEVER like to brag but it seems worthy in this post. I make $40/hr wage, have the best health and dental benefits that you could ask for, get an average of $1-$2 raise per hour, per year. There are roughly 30 companies in my local and if I get laid off from one cause work is slow, I have roughly 29 other companies that I can get hired by and no negotiations with pay are necessary. We have an annuity and pension plan that are bar none, no 401-K's. And a lot of our work is companies that the government gives all the big tax breaks to who build brand new multi million dollar buildings to fund their business. How are we as a union going to have our jobs transferred elsewhere when this country gives huge tax breaks to the rich, big businesses? Time to give up your cozy job as a Wal Mart greeter. It isn't helping you.

jeffbr

cropduster82 wrote:

Well, I'm in a union. And I gotta say, you're way off base. How are union workers gonna be a part of their own demise. Nurses, hotel workers, police officers, firefighters construction workers are some of the biggest parts of our society. I am a union constuction worker and, I NEVER like to brag but it seems worthy in this post. I make $40/hr wage, have the best health and dental benefits that you could ask for, get an average of $1-$2 raise per hour, per year. There are roughly 30 companies in my local and if I get laid off from one cause work is slow, I have roughly 29 other companies that I can get hired by and no negotiations with pay are necessary. We have an annuity and pension plan that are bar none, no 401-K's. And a lot of our work is companies that the government gives all the big tax breaks to who build brand new multi million dollar buildings to fund their business. How are we as a union going to have our jobs transferred elsewhere when this country gives huge tax breaks to the rich, big businesses? Time to give up your cozy job as a Wal Mart greeter. It isn't helping you.

You started by asking a question, and ended up answering it. Unions have been very successful at pricing labor over the top and out of the country.

jeffbr

Commy wrote:

Your power is your ability to shut down the company, by refusing to work.....that is your power, the ability to shut down the business you are working for. There is more power in that than many people realize I think.

The great thing about my state is that we have "at will" employment. You are free to quit anytime. I am free to dismiss you at any time without cause.

If you start threatening me, you're fired. Unskilled labor is a comodity, and there is a line of people waiting to be hired. If you don't want the job, or don't want to work for what we've already agreed to, then it was fun while it lasted, but I'm going to look elsewhere. Thanks for your past efforts, I wish you well in your future endeavors.

supersonicyears

jeffbr wrote:

The great thing about my state is that we have "at will" employment. You are free to quit anytime. I am free to dismiss you at any time without cause.

If you start threatening me, you're fired. Unskilled labor is a comodity, and there is a line of people waiting to be hired. If you don't want the job, or don't want to work for what we've already agreed to, then it was fun while it lasted, but I'm going to look elsewhere. Thanks for your past efforts, I wish you well in your future endeavors.

What about if you do want to work for what was agreed to and then your employer cuts wages by about $4.00 dollars an hour? Is that right?
The company I work for is a work at home employer. They route calls to you and you log into their system(no it's not a chat line ). The wage wasn't that great to begin with but I figured I didn't have to drive to work and the schedule if very flexible so it seemed worth it. Then they outsourced to two other countries since I started working for them and slowly lowered our pay over the last year.
There was an email that went out supposedly by another employee who was upset about the pay drop when it was only about $2.00 drop. It wasn't to everyone at the company only about 20 people were sent the email. She said she was unable to get everyone's. I'm not sure if she was legit.... Only a couple of people responded to her from what I could see from the the cc's.
I would love to talk to a union to see if there was anything they could do to help this situation. But now, It would be hard to find out who my fellow employees are to discuss it with them. They have changed the system so you can no longer view who is working. I am in search of another job, but it's hard with the way the economy is lately.

cropduster82 wrote:

Well, I'm in a union. And I gotta say, you're way off base. How are union workers gonna be a part of their own demise. Nurses, hotel workers, police officers, firefighters construction workers are some of the biggest parts of our society. I am a union constuction worker and, I NEVER like to brag but it seems worthy in this post. I make $40/hr wage, have the best health and dental benefits that you could ask for, get an average of $1-$2 raise per hour, per year. There are roughly 30 companies in my local and if I get laid off from one cause work is slow, I have roughly 29 other companies that I can get hired by and no negotiations with pay are necessary. We have an annuity and pension plan that are bar none, no 401-K's. And a lot of our work is companies that the government gives all the big tax breaks to who build brand new multi million dollar buildings to fund their business. How are we as a union going to have our jobs transferred elsewhere when this country gives huge tax breaks to the rich, big businesses? Time to give up your cozy job as a Wal Mart greeter. It isn't helping you.

Do they hire women construction workers at your company?? Are they hiring??

youngster

jeffbr wrote:

The great thing about my state is that we have "at will" employment. You are free to quit anytime. I am free to dismiss you at any time without cause.

If you start threatening me, you're fired. Unskilled labor is a comodity, and there is a line of people waiting to be hired. If you don't want the job, or don't want to work for what we've already agreed to, then it was fun while it lasted, but I'm going to look elsewhere. Thanks for your past efforts, I wish you well in your future endeavors.

Yep, there's tons of illegal immigrants that would do your job, whatever it may be for 1/2 price. So, I'd love to hear this from you when you're standing in the unemplyment line someday wondering why someone who isn't qualified came and took your job away. It's this kind of thinking that got this country into the problems we're in now.

youngster

TheBeach wrote:

What about if you do want to work for what was agreed to and then your employer cuts wages by about $4.00 dollars an hour? Is that right?
The company I work for is a work at home employer. They route calls to you and you log into their system(no it's not a chat line ). The wage wasn't that great to begin with but I figured I didn't have to drive to work and the schedule if very flexible so it seemed worth it. Then they outsourced to two other countries since I started working for them and slowly lowered our pay over the last year.
There was an email that went out supposedly by another employee who was upset about the pay drop when it was only about $2.00 drop. It wasn't to everyone at the company only about 20 people were sent the email. She said she was unable to get everyone's. I'm not sure if she was legit.... Only a couple of people responded to her from what I could see from the the cc's.
I would love to talk to a union to see if there was anything they could do to help this situation. But now, It would be hard to find out who my fellow employees are to discuss it with them. They have changed the system so you can no longer view who is working. I am in search of another job, but it's hard with the way the economy is lately.


Do they hire women construction workers at your company?? Are they hiring??

Yes, the union I work in hires women and we have about 20 or so working at this time. We hire once a year and it is open employment. All you need is a high school diploma or GED and take a aptitude test.

supersonicyears

cropduster82 wrote:

Yes, the union I work in hires women and we have about 20 or so working at this time. We hire once a year and it is open employment. All you need is a high school diploma or GED and take a aptitude test.

What state do you live in?