Why aren't we on the side of the union protesters?

[Golding]

Nobody is saying they can't associate with each other. This bill doesn't take away their right to be a union. The governor is saying that they can't keep purchasing Democrats to vote themselves pay raises that exceed COLA. If they want to associate and take their request for bigger financial gain to the same public that has to pay it, they're perfectly able to do that.

In fairness, the bill does take away the right for University of Wisconsin workers, child care workers, and home nursing workers to unionize. Considering where their income actually comes from, and considering the benefits that some of them receive (ie: tenure) at the expense of taxpayers, I don't really sympathize with them. But nonetheless, there is some truth that specific jobs are having their collective bargaining abilities revoked.

 

[Carson]

How many more weeks of the Unions malarkey?

They are looting us and spending for their projects, front organizations, and other hoopla while our attention is diverted. Are they not?

 

[Stary Hickory]

In fairness, the bill does take away the right for University of Wisconsin workers, child care workers, and home nursing workers to unionize. Considering where their income actually comes from, and considering the benefits that some of them receive (ie: tenure) at the expense of taxpayers, I don't really sympathize with them. But nonetheless, there is some truth that specific jobs are having their collective bargaining abilities revoked.

Absolutely false as an employer they are stipulating that they will on hire and employ people who refrain from attempting to use unions for certain purposes. These people are still free to unionize and make whatever demands...and WI can fire them or refuse them.

 

[madfoot]

My own mother is a teacher, and when she walked up to me to ask me to support collective bargaining and to raise taxes for the building of a new local school, I told her that taxation is wrong, and that her job needs to be privatized and paid for by willing participants, not forcibly through theft. That's how strongly I feel about the situation. Never compromise. Taxation is wrong, no matter how much benefit it brings. Proverbs 16:8 says, "Better a little with righteousness than much gain with injustice." I will never perform a wrong in order to bring about a right, for to do so brings about no righteousness at all.

So you're okay with disproportionately hurting the working class, as long as the end justifies the means by lowering taxes for somebody.

 

[dbill27]

yeah I'm on neither side, for where both sides are for voluntarism, I agree, where both sides are for compulsion, I'm agains

Where are the protestors on the side of voluntarism?

 

[Philhelm]

So you're okay with disproportionately hurting the working class, as long as the end justifies the means by lowering taxes for somebody.

Really? That's a disinegenuous question, and falsely assumes that the working class is morally superior simply by the virtue of having less wealth than the employer class. Are all employers evil robber barons, pilfering the public? guitarlifter made it clear that he believes that taxation is morally wrong, yet you twist that into a class warfare issue, mixed with accusations of greed and selfishness on the part of those that involuntarily labor in order to provide the government with money.

If the teachers were in the private sector, I would have no problem with their union. The problem is with public sector unions. Who's the oppressor here? The Wisconsin taxpayer? As far as I'm concerned, government workers are the government, or at least part of it. The bottom line is that it's the public unions that are selfish and greedy; they are the aggressor, and it's the taxpayer that is the defender.

Edit: Also, what about those who are forced to join a public union in order to retain certain jobs? What of their rights?

 

[Sentient Void]

The myth of collective bargaining... exploded.

 

[dbill27]

The myth of collective bargaining... exploded.

Thank you for posting this, can't wait to put it on facebook tommorow during prime-time.

 

[madfoot]

If the teachers were in the private sector, I would have no problem with their union. The problem is with public sector unions. Who's the oppressor here? The Wisconsin taxpayer? As far as I'm concerned, government workers are the government, or at least part of it. The bottom line is that it's the public unions that are selfish and greedy; they are the aggressor, and it's the taxpayer that is the defender.

So basically, because teachers work for the state, they're not entitled to the right of free association that the private sector enjoys? I don't really see the fairness in that. It just seems to me like a lot of you against the unions are being blinded by ideology here.

I mean, "The Wisconsin taxpayer" - you're acting like these people don't pay taxes. They *are* the Wisconsin taxpayers.

 

[Sentient Void]

So basically, because teachers work for the state, they're not entitled to the right of free association that the private sector enjoys? I don't really see the fairness in that. It just seems to me like a lot of you against the unions are being blinded by ideology here.

I mean, "The Wisconsin taxpayer" - you're acting like these people don't pay taxes. They *are* the Wisconsin taxpayers.

No. You are conflating the 'right to associate' with some alleged 'right to bargain', There is *no* 'right to bargain'. That is a *privilege*. You can ask to bargain all you want, and the person you want to bargain with can agree to talk with you, or he can tell you to go fuck yourself. He has the right to not associate with you, much like you have the right to associate with anyone you choose.

There are net taxpayers, and net taxtakers. Public union workers, public workers in general, whether they pay 10%, 20%, 30%, 50%, 70% or 99% of their income in taxes - are net tax-takers. All of their income is funded by taxation. So now, they are not taxpayers. They are taxtakers. The taxpayers are their bosses, and they have the right to tell them *no*. They have the right to dictate what they are paid, and the right to decide whether they want to bargain with them or not, and if they don't like it - they can go work somewhere else. Maybe actually be productive for once in their parasitic lives when they work in the private sector.

 

[Fox McCloud]

As Walter Block pointed out, paying taxes, for government employees, is just a formality--they don't actually pay taxes, at all; their income, once adjusted for taxes taken out, is what they're really getting payed.

 

[Danke]

As Walter Block pointed out, paying taxes, for government employees, is just a formality--they don't actually pay taxes, at all; their income, once adjusted for taxes taken out, is what they're really getting payed.

Exactly. That is why it is called a "Return." The Income Tax is an excise tax (i.e. a privilege tax) on a government related activity.