I had no idea Scott Walker was so popular

[regexcellent]

Don't worry about the environment. It'll go away.

I don't recycle. I drive an SUV. I'm ashamed to say, however, that my power comes from the hydroelectric plant on the Genessee River downtown.

Not to get off track from how horrible unions are, though.

[C0ckney]

Brilliant! You've demonstrated that if we get rid of collective bargaining, workers won't be able to collectively bargain!

we, that is to say, voters, want to keep collective bargaining and the unions are defending that right.

[Kuciwalker]

That's an inspired argument. We want it, therefore keeping it is good and getting rid of it is bad!

Note that the election in Wisconsin right now demonstrates that the voters don't, in fact, support collective bargaining.

[C0ckney]

That's an inspired argument. We want it, therefore keeping it is good and getting rid of it is bad!

thank you. perhaps one day you'll be able to make an intelligent argument in favour of your position.

and yes, rights come from society deciding that it wants people to have those rights. so if someone tries to get rid of rights that the society wants people to have, that is bad.

Note that the election in Wisconsin right now demonstrates that the voters don't, in fact, support collective bargaining.

that's funny, because polls have repeatedly shown, and i have pointed this out to you in past, that voters support the right to collective bargaining.

[Kuciwalker]

And yet right here we have an actual election based entirely around a politician actually ending collective bargaining. This seems like as close as you can come to a referendum on the question without actually holding a referendum. And it looks like the anti-collective bargaining side will win. I guess that shows getting rid of collective bargaining is a good thing, because the voters don't want it!

[C0ckney]

i am basing my view about what the voters want on several polls which asked people directly about collective bargaining.

you are basing yours on an election which hasn't happened yet.

the election will be close, let's see what happens.

[regexcellent]

Actually, polls are saying it's supposed to be an easy victory for Scott Walker.

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/227189-poll-wisc-gov-scott-walker-leads-dem-opponent-by-9-points-in-recall

[Dinner]

Why should State workers be forced to join a Union and have dues taken from their paycheck as a condition of employment? If the Union is so great let the employee join it of his own volition.

Why should shareholders have part of their profits taken from them so CEOs can give it to politicians as campaign contributions? If the politicians were so great let the shareholders pay to them of his own volition.

[DinoDoc]

Why should shareholders have part of their profits taken from them so CEOs can give it to politicians as campaign contributions? If the politicians were so great let the shareholders pay to them of his own volition.

Apples do not equal oranges. Can you answer the question posed or not?

[Dinner]

The question I asked? Yes, they shouldn't be able to give one red cent without a complete shareholder vote on each individual campaign donation. Do that and then we can make similar laws about union fees but until then you're just the same partisan hack you've always been.

[regexcellent]

Not your question; DinoDoc's question. Christ.

[Hauldren Collider]

That's an inspired argument. We want it, therefore keeping it is good and getting rid of it is bad!

Yeah, QED!

[Hauldren Collider]

That's interesting. Do you really think this, or is it your last stand at consistency?

He didn't say "exploited and consumed to the point where it is no longer exploitable or consumable." He merely stated the obvious truth that the environment is, in fact, there to be used. Not in the "god created the earth for humans" sense, but in the sense of "what the **** else would you do with it"

[Kuciwalker]

OM NOM NOM

[giblets]

He didn't say "exploited and consumed to the point where it is no longer exploitable or consumable." He merely stated the obvious truth that the environment is, in fact, there to be used. Not in the "god created the earth for humans" sense, but in the sense of "what the **** else would you do with it"

Conserve it for future generations? If they're going to be ripped off with a huge national debt and social security could they at least have an environment that isn't trashed to satisfy greed?