3 ms·
Where's the snark? I'm asking you why if you're opposed to mandatory contribution of union dues by employees, you're not similarly opposed to mandatory contribu
by djrobstep 5y ago
Where's the snark? I'm asking you why if you're opposed to mandatory contribution of union dues by employees, you're not similarly opposed to mandatory contribution to shareholder profits by employees. It's a 100% genuine question.
- BuckRogers 5y agoYour point is actually very interesting to me. I've never heard that before. I get it- maybe I "don't wanna" contribute to x, y, or z. What right do I have to do about those things? That "takes away my agency and freedom", right? I found your point insightful. Because you can't really have it one way, and not the other. Just cherry-picking what you find offensive in an employment agreement. If there is a union involved, you can just find another job! Same solution I'm presented if I prefer profits to go into my pocket, rather than someone else's.
- djrobstep 5y agoThanks, I’m glad somebody has grasped the point I’m making - which is that the whole system is built around coercion, so singling out one arbitrary part of it as involuntary is completely inconsistent and ideological.