Liberty without public-union restrictions. Is it doable?

image

You must need to login..!

Description

Liberty without public-union restrictions. Is it doable?Sponsor: AdamVsTheMan.com – Liberty without public-union restrictions? Is it doable? See the above link for details on Adam Kokesh’s new Russia Today show . How you can buy an advert on this show http Or use the direct link: nhunderground.com wisonsin protests demonstrations ron paul, demonstrators occupy state house carried off fox news haters free state project movement new hampshire republicans dj bettancourt ridleyreport dave ridley report nh seiu government public sector unions. staters fir

24 comments on “Liberty without public-union restrictions. Is it doable?

  1. askifICare on

    Wisconsin on steroids? The scary Kurk amendment makes NH law match that crazy right wing state of Massachusetts. The NH bill DOES NOT remove public sector unions ability to collectively bargain.

  2. antichrist1909589 on

    well could the public sector be privatized? i have no problem with private unions because they are going up against the bosses of the industry they work for..but public unions get $ from tax payers whether or not the tax payer uses/benefits from what the public sector unions are providing…also making the tax increases for these unions voluntary would be another option that way the unions can see which ppl want the services and which ones dont, could there be an opt out option for the services?

  3. rrhynes on

    I’ll be for keeping collective bargaining when public unions can no longer contribute to political campaigns or advertisements for the same.

  4. shadesradio on

    collective bargaining is not all about money and benefits. sometimes its about working conditions, class sizes etc. Corporations should not be able to contribute to campaigns if unions can’t. Hell no individuals should be able to contribute to a campaign. everybody should have a set amount of money paid for by taxes and the rest of the tv time should be equal and free to the final candidtaes. But in this corporate controlled media, the most money wins a lot of times.

  5. dyne313 on

    Look at the maturity of the freedom movement, vs. the public sector unions. The public sector unions are immature, loud, angry, ect.

  6. TreachMarkets on

    Watching two groups of angry people arguing over your money is a sickening spectacle.

  7. Worldslargestipod on

    I have an idea ridley:

    Any additional money public sector unions want will have to be collected through tax revenue that is collected door to door and the collections must be made by volunteers taken from the public sector unions who get the extra compensation.

    NH residents are not obligated to give the money unless they are solicited to do so by the unions.

    This way, they can look the taxpayer in the face when they tell them that they deserve more of their money.

  8. twn5858 on

    @something224 “Get rid of property tax and have sales tax!”

    Why not get ride of both.

  9. Helionaeic on

    @shadesradio

    ” everybody should have a set amount of money paid for by taxes”

    Why must I be forced to pay for elections out of my earnings, taken against my will, to promote people I don’t trust, to make rules I don’t agree with?

    I don’t vote because nobody represents me better than I do.

  10. werbelloff on

    max keiser is a fucking idiot for saying collective bargaining agreements were “progress”

  11. TheCaptainSlappy on

    @Treach Watching 2 groups and one “Tax Payer” fight over money that doesn’t exist, and isn’t theirs, is sickeningly amusing and highly ironic. A fight over virtual numbers…..

  12. juliaisafilmbuff123 on

    The workers and unions are NOT the problem: the state is. What are these people to do if they lose their salaries? “Self-employment!” you will say. Yes, that works fine in your fantasy world, but this is reality.

  13. ashleyjohnston on

    While | appreciate the differences between public and private unions, aren’t they kinda like public and private corporations in that both derive their status from the government.

  14. CoinsFreedom on

    I say… another beer and toast it high for FREEDOM. It worked for the Scotts. Then take out the laundry. I think William Wallce said that OR some facsimile thereof.

  15. promontorium on

    I’ve never seen an inherent conflict between unions and liberty. Every individual has a right to free association, unions should be such (not obligatory as is the case in some jobs). Similarly, if people want to “collectively bargain” the person, or person’s they are bargaining with ALSO have the right to “collectively bargain” i.e. fire them. Deny their demands, cut their wages, etc. And the government should have as policy to reject all collective bargains. No problems. Liberty for all.

  16. terrygus1 on

    how did we get into this problem???? well lets see if were in trouble with the people that were in office then lets say they will not get us out of trouble there has to be some other adjenda that is sneeking up on we the people—–like say user fees instead of income tax —–I would say that they wan`t to switch to user fees and when implamented they cane easly raise the rate to just the wealthy people can then pay the fees and guess what they will own all the lake front .

  17. CurtHowland on

    The one answer that would solve the problem is to privatize everything and let the “unions” and their closed shops compete against private efforts to provide the same service.

  18. hoosiergambler on

    @juliaisafilmbuff123 sorry, juliaisafilmbuff, but i feel big corporations are our common enemy here. the state was our friend, until we allowed big corporation & m.i. complex to wrest our govt away from us; ike tried warning us, we can take it back! indeed, unions are our friend. what’s wrong with collective bargaining? i thought that was very ‘american’. that’s what we do with our govt most novembers. silly me, authoritarian dictatorship is obviously preferable in the work place!

  19. shadesradio on

    collective bargaining is not all about money and benefits. sometimes its about working conditions, class sizes etc. Corporations should not be able to contribute to campaigns if unions can’t. Hell no individuals should be able to contribute to a campaign. everybody should have a set amount of money paid for by taxes and the rest of the tv time should be equal and free to the final candidates. But in this corporate controlled media, the most money wins a lot of times.

Comments are closed.

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!