3 ms·

For example in the UK unions funded politicians who voted to invade Iraq. Which worker was that in benefit of? And powerful people in unions can have regressiv

For example in the UK unions funded politicians who voted to invade Iraq. Which worker was that in benefit of? And powerful people in unions can have regressive ideas. For example pay based on seniority is ageist. At the end of the day a union is a group of bullies like any other.

betterunix2 5y ago
What else did those politicians vote on? If your claim is that the union funded politicians because of their support for the invasion of Iraq, that is an extraordinary claim that demands extraordinary proof. Let's see your proof. [Edit: At the end of the day, union leaders are elected by union members, and if the members do not like how their contract is negotiated they can elect different leaders or otherwise make their voices heard. Call it "bullying" if you want, but I fail to see how non-unionized workers are not being bullied by the companies they work for, given how one-sided negotiations between individual workers and companies are.]
- chrisseaton 5y ago
  Why does it matter why they funded them? Why are they funding them all all? What is going on the unions are funding one particular political viewpoint?
  - betterunix2 5y ago
    Read the post you replied to; unions fund politicians who are friendly toward unions because corporations fund politicians who are antagonistic toward unions (or, if we are being charitable, let's say "politicians who are friendly to corporate interests").
    - chrisseaton 5y ago
      They’re friendly forwards unions… oh but by the way they’re also anti-Semitic. No thanks. I don’t want to fund that. Imagine if for example you were a Green or a Liberal. The idea of funding Labour could be seriously offensive to you.
      - betterunix2 5y ago
        ...because the corporations on the other side of the table would never support antisemites [0], white nationalists [1], fascists [2], or political parties that harbor and support such deplorable people [3]. Not that the workers have any say in who their employers make contributions to. [0] https://www.opensecrets.org/members-of-congress/marjorie-taylor-greene/summary?cid=N00044701 https://www.opensecrets.org/members-of-congress/marjorie-tay... [1] https://www.opensecrets.org/members-of-congress/steven-a-king/summary?cid=N00025237 https://www.opensecrets.org/members-of-congress/steven-a-kin... [2] https://www.opensecrets.org/pres16/contributors?id=n00023864 https://www.opensecrets.org/pres16/contributors?id=n00023864 [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republican_Party_(United_States) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republican_Party_(United_State...
        chrisseaton 5y ago
        I don’t get your argument? Other people fund evil so workers might as well do the same?
        betterunix2 5y ago
        Look, I already explained this in my other comments, but you are just ignoring those and repeating anti-union propaganda. Either you are a troll or you are some kind of paid anti-union consultant; if you actually want an answer to your question, read what I wrote again.

betterunix2 5y ago

What else did those politicians vote on? If your claim is that the union funded politicians because of their support for the invasion of Iraq, that is an extraordinary claim that demands extraordinary proof. Let's see your proof. [Edit: At the end of the day, union leaders are elected by union members, and if the members do not like how their contract is negotiated they can elect different leaders or otherwise make their voices heard. Call it "bullying" if you want, but I fail to see how non-unionized workers are not being bullied by the companies they work for, given how one-sided negotiations between individual workers and companies are.]

chrisseaton 5y ago
Why does it matter why they funded them? Why are they funding them all all? What is going on the unions are funding one particular political viewpoint?
- betterunix2 5y ago
  Read the post you replied to; unions fund politicians who are friendly toward unions because corporations fund politicians who are antagonistic toward unions (or, if we are being charitable, let's say "politicians who are friendly to corporate interests").
  - chrisseaton 5y ago
    They’re friendly forwards unions… oh but by the way they’re also anti-Semitic. No thanks. I don’t want to fund that. Imagine if for example you were a Green or a Liberal. The idea of funding Labour could be seriously offensive to you.
    - betterunix2 5y ago
      ...because the corporations on the other side of the table would never support antisemites [0], white nationalists [1], fascists [2], or political parties that harbor and support such deplorable people [3]. Not that the workers have any say in who their employers make contributions to. [0] https://www.opensecrets.org/members-of-congress/marjorie-taylor-greene/summary?cid=N00044701 https://www.opensecrets.org/members-of-congress/marjorie-tay... [1] https://www.opensecrets.org/members-of-congress/steven-a-king/summary?cid=N00025237 https://www.opensecrets.org/members-of-congress/steven-a-kin... [2] https://www.opensecrets.org/pres16/contributors?id=n00023864 https://www.opensecrets.org/pres16/contributors?id=n00023864 [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republican_Party_(United_States) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republican_Party_(United_State...
      - chrisseaton 5y ago
        I don’t get your argument? Other people fund evil so workers might as well do the same?
        betterunix2 5y ago
        Look, I already explained this in my other comments, but you are just ignoring those and repeating anti-union propaganda. Either you are a troll or you are some kind of paid anti-union consultant; if you actually want an answer to your question, read what I wrote again.