Scott Walker's crusade continues

[MichaeltheGreat]

Do you have a source for this claim yet? Maybe just a link or something, explaining how public sector unions were a post WWII response to patronage abuses that ended in the 1870s?

Your sophomoric word games are boring. That's not what I said, and patronage at state and local levels was alive and well long after the 1870s - well into the depression in some agencies/areas and particular state machines. Huey Long, anybody? Just for one example.

Try google.com if you want to find links on labor history. Better yet, try looking for actual books. Government worker strikes began well before the War of Yankee Aggression, many major police departments were unionized by 1919, as were teachers and fire departments. Unionization in federal and state general government agencies was delayed not because of lack of interest or effort, but because of hostile legislation and hostile executive authorities. I referred to efforts to unionize, not near universal certification. If you want an example back to the beginnings of civil service, try the RMMBA which was formed in the mid 1870s. That's just one. Early unions didn't have CB rights because courts and legislatures beholden to the political and private sector elites did everything they could to cripple the unions on the legal front, then you had the Pinkertons and similar swine handling things the other direction.

[Felch]

So... Because MJ wasn't legalized officially (just made pseudo legal as "medicine") the state has no moral compass? Jesus, we're still better off than 24 or 25 states on the issue.

So, because you know that you're a gullible fool who swallows propaganda without question, you want to change the subject? There's a reason people relentlessly mock the **** out of you, and it's because you're the left coast Ben.

[Felch]

Your sophomoric word games are boring. That's not what I said, and patronage at state and local levels was alive and well long after the 1870s - well into the depression in some agencies/areas and particular state machines. Huey Long, anybody? Just for one example.

Try google.com if you want to find links on labor history. Better yet, try looking for actual books. Government worker strikes began well before the War of Yankee Aggression, many major police departments were unionized by 1919, as were teachers and fire departments. Unionization in federal and state general government agencies was delayed not because of lack of interest or effort, but because of hostile legislation and hostile executive authorities. I referred to efforts to unionize, not near universal certification. If you want an example back to the beginnings of civil service, try the RMMBA which was formed in the mid 1870s. That's just one. Early unions didn't have CB rights because courts and legislatures beholden to the political and private sector elites did everything they could to cripple the unions on the legal front, then you had the Pinkertons and similar swine handling things the other direction.

I have absolutely no idea who the RMMBA is, unless you're referring to the Ridge Meadows Minor Baseball Association. Google didn't come up with much more.

I've googled, I found a book, Public Workers: Government Employee Unions, the Law, and the State, 1900-1962, which doesn't mention the RMMBA at all either. I searched it for patronage, and found that the institution of patronage was detrimental to the formation of unions. I have put in more effort trying to confirm your ridiculous claims than you have, and I haven't found ****. Try posting a single ****ing link, to anything at all, if you want me to believe another one of your claims.

[Felch]

So, to recap, I'm waiting for Dinner to answer this question:

Is it possible that your sources of information are just as ludicrously biased as these, and is it possible that your absolutist attitude is a consequence of swallowing propaganda without question?

Whenever you're ready, Dinner.

And I'm waiting for MtG or MrFun (the wannabe history teacher) to provide a single scrap of evidence to support their claims.

Of course, what I expect is more personal attacks and misdirection because you all know that I'm right and you're wrong.

[MichaeltheGreat]

I have absolutely no idea who the RMMBA is, unless you're referring to the Ridge Meadows Minor Baseball Association. Google didn't come up with much more.

I've googled, I found a book, Public Workers: Government Employee Unions, the Law, and the State, 1900-1962, which doesn't mention the RMMBA at all either. I searched it for patronage, and found that the institution of patronage was detrimental to the formation of unions. I have put in more effort trying to confirm your ridiculous claims than you have, and I haven't found ****. Try posting a single ****ing link, to anything at all, if you want me to believe another one of your claims.

That's because the book started with the year 1900. The original mail workers union was the Railway Mail Mutual Benefit Association formed in the 1870s. It had no CB rights (legislation and Pinks prevented such things, but it did actively pursue the union function of lobbying on behalf of its members and members paid due for benefits and the lobbying activities, so it meets the core requirements of being a union. And USPS didn't exist at the time, the Postmaster General (aka Chief Patronage Executive) was a cabinet level position until 1971.

If you think the civil service system ended patronage in the 1870s, It never touched the excepted service (which included legislative and judicial and EOP staff, USPTO, USSS, USMS among agencies that existed at the time, and senior level executives within government offices weren't covered at all, until formation of the SES in the late 1970s.

Oh, and I don't give a dead rat's left ass cheek what you believe.

Of course patronage was detrimental to the formation of unions - any pay to play scheme is. That doesn't mean that no attempts to organize, strike, or otherwise act collectively ever took place. Nice that you found something on your own effort - keep trying, you might educate yourself some more.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Of course, what I expect is more personal attacks and misdirection because you all know that I'm right and you're wrong.

Spend a lot of time posing in front of a mirror, do we?

[Imran Siddiqui]

Jeez, Felch, this: http://www.acronymgeek.com/RMMBA was on PAGE 1 of a Google search. Talk about not trying at all.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Gotta love that publick eduma... edumacash... er uh, skool sist'em there.

[Felch]

Jeez, Felch, this: http://www.acronymgeek.com/RMMBA was on PAGE 1 of a Google search. Talk about not trying at all.

Sorry for not clicking on the acronym geek link. I figured something so well known that it went without further explanation would have merited its own page.

[Felch]

That's because the book started with the year 1900. The original mail workers union was the Railway Mail Mutual Benefit Association formed in the 1870s. It had no CB rights (legislation and Pinks prevented such things, but it did actively pursue the union function of lobbying on behalf of its members and members paid due for benefits and the lobbying activities, so it meets the core requirements of being a union. And USPS didn't exist at the time, the Postmaster General (aka Chief Patronage Executive) was a cabinet level position until 1971.

If you think the civil service system ended patronage in the 1870s, It never touched the excepted service (which included legislative and judicial and EOP staff, USPTO, USSS, USMS among agencies that existed at the time, and senior level executives within government offices weren't covered at all, until formation of the SES in the late 1970s.

Oh, and I don't give a dead rat's left ass cheek what you believe.

Of course patronage was detrimental to the formation of unions - any pay to play scheme is. That doesn't mean that no attempts to organize, strike, or otherwise act collectively ever took place. Nice that you found something on your own effort - keep trying, you might educate yourself some more.

Still not a single source for any of your claims.

[Felch]

And by the way, thank you Imran for being the first person to link me to any sort of information whatsoever.

[Felch]

Still haven't seen a single ****ing link from you MtG. Not even a recommendation for what book I should read. Nothing at all to substantiate your claims.

[Felch]

Public service unions came about because of a system of shakedowns starting with political hack appointees and working its way down in a manner that put the pre-reformation Catholic church to shame. Just like in a lot of third world countries today - you bought a government job, then pay a shakedown every paycheck to maintain it. That abuse is the atmosphere that spawned unions in the public sector, just as different abuses spawned labor unions in the private sector.

I'm still trying to find evidence of this. I went to the APWU's website and they don't mention forming as a response to shakedowns at all. I've asked you several times to provide evidence for this claim, and all I've gotten is a bunch of childish insults about my education. Sorry if my education taught me to trust accountable sources instead of anonymous internet postings, but that's just the way I was brought up.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Sorry for not clicking on the acronym geek link. I figured something so well known that it went without further explanation would have merited its own page.

If you're looking at early labor movement history, welcome to the obscure. Here's also a hint for you. In the old days when dinosaurs roamed the earth and the permapostpubescent crowd had to do something other than whine on internet fora, they had these things called "books" where a lot of academic material was concentrated. The vast majority of which is not on the internet or in the public domain. So sometimes, grasshopper, if you want to learn, you have to get off your ass and seek info, not have it spoonfed to you.

[MrFun]

And I'm waiting for MtG or MrFun (the wannabe history teacher) to provide a single scrap of evidence to support their claims.

Of course, what I expect is more personal attacks and misdirection because you all know that I'm right and you're wrong.

General information about the history of American labor on wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labor_h..._United_States

Information about the Haymarket riot: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haymarket_affair

Here's a book on American law and labor: http://www.amazon.com/American-Labor...american+labor

A collection of primary sources regarding historical American labor: http://www.amazon.com/Voice-People-I...american+labor

The nineteenth century transition from artisans to workers: http://www.amazon.com/Artisans-into-...american+labor

Another book: http://www.amazon.com/American-Labor...american+labor

A book on the Ludlow massacre: http://www.amazon.com/Blood-Passion-...american+labor

An online timeline of American labor history: http://prospect.org/brief-history-am...r#.UMtxAG-7OSo