Union Confusion

There is a great deal of confusion about the union issues right now. First of all I would like to say I'm not completely against unions. In the private sector I've seen times where they can do a great deal of good for the employees and still not hurt the company.

That being said I would like to say that I'm not for government unions. I do not believe they are either good or right. Oh the workers may end up with great things. The problem is their relationship to the government. For lack of a better term this is an incestuous relationship.

As I have mentioned in another article there is no difference between what is happening and money laundering. Our taxes are being funneled through the government to the public employees and then back to government officials. There is further an expectation of services from the official for the support offered to them by the unions with what is ultimately our money.

The representatives make sure to give the unions and their workers very generous pay and benefits in turn those unions agree to kick back a percentage (never specified in amount, though always very large) back to specific representatives. (always those that will continue to shovel more money to the unions.

This one hand washing the other situation has got to come to an end. Much like regular criminal money laundering it is very difficult to prove. Regardless of this difficulty it does not change the ethics of it. Because the Unions continue to demand more and ever more from the government, the government continues to demand more and ever more from the people in taxes. This is what is normally known as extortion. What is the difference between this and racketeering? I cannot think of any real difference, except instead of being threatened with having your legs broken you are threated with prison if you do not pay the taxes they demand.

Our representatives refuse to be responsible with our money and yet they still feel they have every right to demand more. After all it is for the good of the people.

To this I say it is for the good of government workers, it is good for politicians who use severe taxing as a means of control and power, and it is good for all the takers in society. The question is whether this is actually good for the rest of the country? They would have us believe that having everyone get free food, education, transportation, even a house, whether they can afford it or not, because YOU'RE not giving your fair share is not compassion and it is not good for the nation.

You might just was well make the case that a man who robs your money from you should not be arrested because he's using it to feed his family, or buy a poor friend of his a car, or a house. These two situations are the same. There is really no difference morally or ethically. The only difference is that the government has the law behind them, but then they're the ones that make the laws.

Is this not like putting a thief in charge of writing laws about what constitutes theft or larceny? Wouldn't the thief always be found innocent and worse you would be the criminal for trying to prevent him from taking what is yours.

The public unions are doing just this now. They are demanding more or at the very least insisting that no one has the right to tell them they can't keep everything they've already bargained for. The rules can only be changed if it is in their favor. Otherwise we are told that we have no right and they have every right and for you to question them is to question THEIR rights.

What about OUR rights? Our right to OUR money! Does anyone have the RIGHT to more money or the RIGHT to more benefits. People have become very confused over what the difference between rights and wants are. Socialism has lent itself to this misunderstanding. It has led us to believe that people don't have a right to more than a specific amount of money. Though who decides what that amount should be isn't clear. It's always some nebulous hatred of "THE RICH". the amount of money seems to change depending on how much you make.

Many public employees are making upwards of $140,000 per year. Yet they insist on calling themselves "middle class" They want to bring down the "RICH". Well then we are in agreement so they should be brought down to the same levels as the rest of us.. how about between 30-50k per year. Oh, I'm quite certain they would scream about such a change to their income.

It is for this reason that say these people don't really want the rich brought down. This is simply a way to stir up hatred and disctract from the fact that they are indeed the elite class themselves. Consider how often it is that the elite classes are the ones getting us angry at those around us who have more than us. They would have us believe these people did it on our backs. In the private industry this is never true. We either given them our money and get a product in return or we decide it is not worth it and don't buy it. In the case of public employees you have no choice but to buy their product and pay for it whether you use or want it. Now I ask you is this really fair or right? But this is what public employee Unions would have you believe.

We ought to be far more outraged at how they have taken our money and income from us and then don't even give our kids a good education. Non-professional teachers, also known as mothers do a far better job of education in home schooling than do most of our teachers. What does this say about these "valued" pubic employees? They often have master's degrees and yet still they do a worse job than regular moms at home. It has been shown that homeschooled kids generally score higher than those in public schools.

I suspect this is because public school teachers are more concerned about picketing, getting benefits and their pay than they are about their students even though they would have us believe they are doing this for the students. It is also such a load of rubbish it is enough to make you almost sick.

The public unions would have you believe that they are the same as other unions and therefore to attack them is the same as attackin all unions, but the reality is quite different. The media is unwilling to do its job in giving information to the people about what these people actually stand for. All they want to do is simply report the propaganda the pubic unions would hand out to us and as such the media is a willing lapdog of the government and the public unions rather than being the watchdog they are supposed to be.

as citizens we ought to be greatly outraged at all this, but then we are all very busy in our lives and our leaders and media depend on that. The public unions being mostly socialist and communist in their leadership count on this as well. They want things to reach a boiling point and thus spark something more violent and out of control. The socialists and communists in our nation which to see this government overthrown and cast aside. They want things to fall apart and would certainly be more than happy even if it turned violent. They somehow think they are going to come out on top. They already see themselves in that place and think they cannot be removed.

For the sake of the nation I hope that Gov. Walker is completely successful in everything he is trying to do where the public unions are concerned. They have far too much power and at this point feel they don't need to worry about anything.

I have to wonder why know one is criticizing the democrats who refuse to come back and vote. At this point it is clearly on them that people are going to start getting laid off. These democrats do not care about jobs or working people, they only care about unions which are not the same thing!