New Hostess owners will refuse to hire union workers

[Cthulhu 2020]

Public assistance used to be taken care of by private citizens and organizations.

I ask again:

Are we allowed to means test for government entitlements (no I do not mean social security as that is not an entitlement).
Are we allowed to drug test people taking the entitlements?
Are we allowed to designate what they can and cannot spend money on if they take money from entitlements?

You think that charity properly handled the poor?

Also, if testing for drugs was by any means efficient I'd be in favor of it, but in light of the recent terrible efficiency of testing vs results and economic problems, I'd say there's a far better use of public funds than spending it on testing that has very little in the way of results.

And yes, most government entitlements are extremely strict on what you can and cannot spend them on. Heck every single citizen benefits from government assistance in subsidies which are built into the prices of things you buy. Do you think they just give 40k to people and tell them to spend it on whatever?

You're also saying this like it isn't already illegal to be on drugs for assistance or misuse assistance funds.

[Laize]

You think that charity properly handled the poor?

Also, if testing for drugs was by any means efficient I'd be in favor of it, but in light of the recent terrible efficiency of testing vs results and economic problems, I'd say there's a far better use of public funds than spending it on testing that has very little in the way of results.

And yes, most government entitlements are extremely strict on what you can and cannot spend them on. Heck every single citizen benefits from government assistance in subsidies which are built into the prices of things you buy. Do you think they just give 40k to people and tell them to spend it on whatever?

Charity would be much better off if it were actually able to function and not be hamstrung by stigma against people working for charities getting paid what they're worth. The nerve.

[Monoxyde]

Many isn't even necessarily a lot, or most. There are plenty of companies that are corrupt, take a look at the banking sector over the past 10 years or so with it's various mis-selling, money laundering, and outsourcing of what would be illegal practice to off-shore subsidiaries, branches, departments etc. That's no reason to dismantle the banking or union system completely because in both cases both systems provide substantial benefits to everyone.

The day unions become obsolete is the day capitalism represents the meritocracy it presents itself as, but until then, the best guy isn't always going to get the best job and so long as that's the case, unions will be necessary as a check to power to the "old boys" networks and nepotism that truly runs the businesses (and much more beside).

haha you act like a lot of unions don't function as their own "old boys" network.

[Ozymandius]

Rubbish. Whoever taught you history failed miserably.



No. Means testing creates poverty traps that hinders social mobility; the entire point behind public assistance.



No, because it's not a significant enough problem to merit the wasting of money on drug testing.


No, it's not a significant enough problem to merit the regulation.

You are incorrect about history of assistance to the needy.
In my opinion, 1 act of fraud is enough to merit it. Why is it acceptable for any person to profit from the money taken from others?

[Kujako]

Why is it acceptable for any person to profit from the money taken from others?

I really cant tell if you're arguing for or against unions...

[Grizzly Willy]

I've always loved the cherry flavored condoms the Democrats use.

I haven't been with anybody, wouldn't know.

My point is that, if we're to choose between two parties that are selectively defending the Constitution, then the party that defends the most aspects of the Constitution is the logical choice.

That being said, when neither fully defend it, neither are worthy of ascribing to.

---------- Post added 2013-04-26 at 11:08 AM ----------

You are incorrect about history of assistance to the needy.
In my opinion, 1 act of fraud is enough to merit it. Why is it acceptable for any person to profit from the money taken from others?

If one act of fraud amongst millions of law abiding recipients is enough to warrant regulation, then one act of gun violence is enough to warrant tighter regulation on firearms.

[Fugus]

Unions do more harm than good today, but still have their uses.

That is HEAVILY debatable, you really have no idea how much of a chilling effect is has on companies attempting to take what they fought for back. I know they are taking it back little by little, but without them entirely, they would have made a massive power grab the moment they thought they could.

Yes, they had their uses.
Yes, many are bad. But many are still good.
Yes, they STILL have their uses.
No, a country without them will not stay without them long unless the government steps in and forces the companies to take proper care of their employees and acts as an employee's union themselves. At least not if they want whats best.

[Elegiac]

You are incorrect about history of assistance to the needy.
In my opinion, 1 act of fraud is enough to merit it. Why is it acceptable for any person to profit from the money taken from others?

Good thing you aren't running a government then, because you'd be a) wasting far more money with minimal gain, and b) hurting those that actually use the system as it is intended to be used, which is the majority.

[GreatOak]

You think that charity properly handled the poor?

Also, if testing for drugs was by any means efficient I'd be in favor of it, but in light of the recent terrible efficiency of testing vs results and economic problems, I'd say there's a far better use of public funds than spending it on testing that has very little in the way of results.

And yes, most government entitlements are extremely strict on what you can and cannot spend them on. Heck every single citizen benefits from government assistance in subsidies which are built into the prices of things you buy. Do you think they just give 40k to people and tell them to spend it on whatever?

LINK benefits are extremely strict. It's actually one of the more effective govt programs due to its simplicity, low cost, and uncorrupted nature. The program also generates roughly $1.50 in GDP for every dollar it costs.

[Cthulhu 2020]

Charity would be much better off if it were actually able to function and not be hamstrung by stigma against people working for charities getting paid what they're worth. The nerve.

Considering many charities are for people's own churches or through charities that they created themselves for tax breaks... yeah, I'd say that stigma is not entirely undeserved.

[Elegiac]

Charity would be much better off if it were actually able to function and not be hamstrung by stigma against people working for charities getting paid what they're worth. The nerve.

"Charity is a cold grey loveless thing. If a rich man wants to help the poor, he should pay his taxes gladly, not dole out money at a whim."

[Gheld]

You forget to mention how the guy who is taking your money also has to make sure you get MORE than he is taking if he wants to keep his position.
So would you rather get $250 a week and him not take any, or you would you rather get $400 a week and have him take $15?

You forgot to read the part where I mentioned being a long time member of the work force, who has actually been in both union and non union shops. So bullshitting me is not possible. The pay spread between union and non union jobs is not that wide, at least not in any high demand industry, and union dues are not that low.

And there's no way on gods green earth I would work for a mere $250-400 a week. That's a terrible example.


Now don't get me wrong, I'm a pragmatist, I support the labour movement as far as it goes to strengthen and support the rights of individual workers. This doesn't necessarily require big ass Unions though.

And I'll leave you with the following two postulates:

A. If a particular industry has a high demand for workers it will pay well and offer benefits with or without a union.
B. If you are training for work in an industry that does not have a high demand, you are foolish.

I'd love to be a Unicorn Veterinarian too, but unfortunately; for about 90% of people, following your dreams and taking a decent paycheque home are two different things.

[Laize]

Considering most charities are for people's own churches or through charities that they created themselves for tax breaks... yeah, I'd say that stigma is not entirely undeserved.

What about this guy? Dude brings in record amounts of money year after year for his charity's cause... then has to close down because people found out he was making $400,000/year and completely halted donations. I mean fuck that guy, right? Who does he think he is? Getting paid well for doing good things for people and doing them better than other groups. Psh.

---------- Post added 2013-04-26 at 04:14 PM ----------

haha you act like a lot of unions don't function as their own "old boys" network.

Isn't there still a Hoffa running the Teamsters?

[mookspal]

That is just sad. I hope no one even considers to get work there then, but i guess people will be forced to with no alternative. Well they are scumbags then, so lets hope that customers will take a stand and boycut.

Do you even know what happened? Do you realize that before the company went bankrupt that the owners told the union that if they did not work out a deal that they would be forced to close. The union said " NOPE," we will not work with you. If I was the new owner, or owner of anything in the US I would not stand for a union. They had their place in time but have become more of a nuance then anything. Prime example can be seen with the United State Post office. Because of the union and "mandatory" raises/ promotions and job security the system has COMPLETELY failed. I have a friend that works at the post office and said because of the union it is impossible to get fired. He has been fired 4-5 times over the last 10 years and has ALWAYS got his job back because of the union. This is a person that did not go into work for a month and when he was ready to go back to work the union made it happen. This is NOT a unique situation. This is happening all over the US. The smart employees that work hard are given the opportunity to work over time and make a crazy amount of money for a mail handler. One year my friend work as much overtime as he could and with a 50K base salary was able to make 110K with overtime. We are talking about tax dollars paying a mail handler 110K a year. This is not only seen in USPS but also in teacher unions and other union based employments. So before you condemn a company and tell people to boycott it you might what to actually understand reasons instead of just making yourself look foolish.

[Fugus]

Not really, I've usually found that reliable people that work hard and do their job get rewarded. Then I deal with people that call out sick once a week when they only work 2-3 days and wonder why they're not getting more.

Nothing is absolute of course, but some people just have a sense of entitlement way out of line with what they actually bring to the table.

I have seen both, I have seen places were the good, hardworking people get rewarded. I have also seen where the good, hardworking people get a pat on the back, thank you and given more work while the bosses friend gets rewarded instead. I have seen people get turned down for a promotion just cause it is cheaper to keep them there compared to someone else who got it instead.

Actually had a lower level boss quit recently were I work and even he admits the only reason they put him in the boss spot was due to the fact that he was the cheapest option and they HAD to fill the job due to corporate policy. Actually a nice guy and decent boss, but even he had no delusions of why he got the job, he literally had gotten it due to the fact he was already at top pay for the area he was in and was the cheapest option as it was only $1 an hour more to put him there and they got to fill his old slot with a new guy for a lot cheaper than him.

[Belize]

I had a twinkie once, at best it was mediocre and I do not understand why people rave about them so much.

Yeah Twinkies really aren't up there in my list of pastries either. I get the icon it represents, but they're not that great.

[Deleted]

That's awesome! Free market wins over communism. Liberal capitalism-haters will certainly be enraged by this and whenever they're mad it means America is doing the right thing. I'd love to see all unions abolished and union leadership jailed on RICO charges.

Yeah, it's been doing wonders for the rich in your country.

The biggest scam there is is that conservative media has been successful in convincing poor people that Unions are bad.

Ever wonder why College Students tend to have liberal and social view-points?

Because they're actually educated.

[Kujako]

Do you even know what happened? Do you realize that before the company went bankrupt that the owners told the union that if they did not work out a deal that they would be forced to close. The union said " NOPE," we will not work with you. If I was the new owner, or owner of anything in the US I would not stand for a union. They had their place in time but have become more of a nuance then anything. Prime example can be seen with the United State Post office. Because of the union and "mandatory" raises/ promotions and job security the system has COMPLETELY failed. I have a friend that works at the post office and said because of the union it is impossible to get fired. He has been fired 4-5 times over the last 10 years and has ALWAYS got his job back because of the union. This is a person that did not go into work for month and when he was ready to go back to work the union made it happen. This is NOT a unique situation. This is happening all over the US. The smart employees that work hard are given the opportunity to work over time and make a crazy amount of money for a mail handler. One year my friend work as much overtime as he could and with a 50K base salary was able to make 110K with overtime. We are talking about tax dollars paying a mail handler 110K a year. This is not only seen in USPS but also in teacher unions and other union based employments. So before you condemn a company and tell people to boycott it you might what to actually understand reasons instead of just making yourself look foolish.

Yea, why didn't the workers agree to more pay cuts after the last round when the executives took their pay and gave it to themselves in the form of 88% raises and golden parachute deals?

[Sunseeker]

What about this guy? Dude brings in record amounts of money year after year for his charity's cause... then has to close down because people found out he was making $400,000/year and completely halted donations. I mean fuck that guy, right? Who does he think he is? Getting paid well for doing good things for people and doing them better than other groups. Psh.

I'm sure we could argue for days on if this guy was getting paid "what he was worth". Was he doing a great job? Sure he was. But regardless of if he deserves that money for that hard work, it is a charity. The point of the operation is to give to some group of people determined to be more needy than everyone else. Making 400k a year, after buying your second or third home, what do you really need that much money for? A "good job"? Honestly if my needs are taken care of, I don't need more than a few extra dollars for some wants.

So since I know you're one of them thar rich folk Laize, what exactly does one do with that much money? Invest? That's just a way to make more money. What do you do with it all? What's the point? Does it just become an endless cycle of more investments to make more money to make more investments to make more money?

[Cthulhu 2020]

What about this guy? Dude brings in record amounts of money year after year for his charity's cause... then has to close down because people found out he was making $400,000/year and completely halted donations. I mean fuck that guy, right? Who does he think he is? Getting paid well for doing good things for people and doing them better than other groups. Psh.

---------- Post added 2013-04-26 at 04:14 PM ----------



Isn't there still a Hoffa running the Teamsters?

Didn't say there weren't any, and that's pretty sad. I do think that when people hear "Not for profit" when it comes to charities they think people work for free, which is stupid. Someone who works full time for a charity should be being compensated adequately. 400k is rather generous for a charity, but also very humble when it comes to executives.