Scott Walker's crusade continues

[MrFun]

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.

[Felch]

Thank you MrFun, for contributing information to this thread.

[MichaeltheGreat]

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.

And of course, any "accountable source" has to be on the internet in a one-page handy dandy article for the needs to be spoonfed crowd.

Here's a little hint: Look into, say, Chicago and New York police department promotions, etc. Not now, back in the day. You probably won't find much online, but if you have access to a decent law library, you'll find all sorts of interesting things on labor history. Major university libraries should have the same things. Want citations handed to you? I get paid for that, I can't be arsed to spend the time spoonfeeding it for free.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Thank you MrFun, for contributing information to this thread.

And thank you for doing likewise.

[MrFun]

And thank you for doing likewise.

[Felch]

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.

And virtually all of those books, even if they're not public domain, can be referenced through the internet, either through http://www.amazon.com/, http://books.google.com/, or any number of other sites. And it's not a matter of wanting information "spoonfed" to me, it's a matter of you proving that you didn't make it all up.

[Felch]

Want citations handed to you?

YES

[Dinner]

Felch, no, I will not agree that our sources are equally biased as the ones I've quoted have used facts where as yours have used complete lies such as the claim that closed shops exist (they've been outlawed since 1947) or that people not in the union have to still pay dues or amounts equal to dues or even the claim that union members cannot opt out of political donations. In short, your sources have been complete bull**** while mine have been factually based and mostly just quoted what the law allows and does not allow. Just because you don't like what it says doesn't mean it is biased when it is simply quoting facts and what the law says.

This is true even if it upsets you or hurts your little feelings.

[Felch]

I love how MtG will waste hours refusing to provide citations that should only take him a few minutes to dig up.

[Felch]

Felch, no, I will not agree that our sources are equally biased as the ones I've quoted have used facts where as yours have used complete lies such as the claim that closed shops exist (they've been outlawed since 1947) or that people not in the union have to still pay dues or amounts equal to dues or even the claim that union members cannot opt out of political donations. In short, your sources have been complete bull**** while mine have been factually based and mostly just quoted what the law allows and does not allow. Just because you don't like what it says doesn't mean it is biased when it is simply quoting facts and what the law says.

This is true even if it upsets you or hurts your little feelings.

Of course your sources aren't biased. The people who write your sources of information have no agenda whatsoever.

[MichaeltheGreat]

I get paid to write research papers. Want me to send my standard consulting agreement/NDA?. Then when I get a retainer or credit card on file (unless you're a corporation or LLC with a D&B rating), I'll be happy to provide you with full research services like I provide my clients.

This forum is nothing but recreation when my brain is exploding on subjects like fully homomorphic encryption or others.

I post off of accumulated knowledge and reading, in a matter of seconds. Not as a freebie product of scholarly or technical research. That is what I'm currently paid to do, and I don't do it for free.

YES

[Dinner]

So your argument is that even though your sources have been caught explicitly lying (or at least talking about things which have been illegal for most of a century) they're still just as good as fact based sources? Sorry, but the real world doesn't work that way and the very fact that they kept talking about closed shops (as if they weren't outlawed 60 years ago) and claimed union members were forced to give political donations shows that they're liars and you're a fool for believing them.

Hell, even when caught red handed in complete lies rather than change course or admit you were wrong you spent 4-5 pages just reprinting the same false garbage. That's why I say the sources aren't the same and the only reason you're trying to claim they are is because you know your sources have zero creditability. Sorry but facts do matter and mine were right while yours were completely wrong. That's just reality.

Your little fantasy echo chamber isn't the same as reality and reality trumps your OPINION especially when your opinion is not factually based.

[MichaeltheGreat]

I love how MtG will waste hours refusing to provide citations that should only take him a few minutes to dig up.

My total active accumulated time posting on this thread will be just over six minutes from start to finish. I type fast and I have a billing tool I wrote that lets me track time spent actively editing or working in specific windows since I have three 27" flatscreens worth and typically multitask on separate billable activities. Sorting that **** out by hand takes too long, and BTW, I type at over 110 wpm.

6 mins 18 seconds. So there

[Felch]

I did a little bit of checking on your criticism of my sources. I'm going to hit this line by line, so we're on the same page.

Felch, no, I will not agree that our sources are equally biased as the ones I've quoted have used facts where as yours have used complete lies such as the claim that closed shops exist (they've been outlawed since 1947)

I did a ctrl+f search of the three articles, and none of them used the words "closed shop". Can you show me where they make this claim?

or that people not in the union have to still pay dues

Don't agency fees exist?

or amounts equal to dues

I don't see this mentioned anywhere in the three articles

or even the claim that union members cannot opt out of political donations.

The one woman, Vicki Schwartz, claimed that after opting out of the political donations she had to officially "resign" from the union. She's still covered by the CBA (and paying agency fees), but she isn't allowed to vote or run in union elections. If this is a lie, please show me evidence. I have googled "vicki schwartz orange county union" and not found anyone disputing her claim. If she's lying, why isn't her union defending themselves publicly? I've looked through the CTA website, and they're silent. I'll keep looking, and see if I can get to the bottom of this.

In short, your sources have been complete bull****

I don't think you've shown that at all.

while mine have been factually based and mostly just quoted what the law allows and does not allow.

I'm not saying that your sources aren't factual, I'm saying that they only present the facts that you want to hear. Any facts that don't agree with your predetermined positions are casually omitted.

[Felch]

My total active accumulated time posting on this thread will be just over six minutes from start to finish. I type fast and I have a billing tool I wrote that lets me track time spent actively editing or working in specific windows since I have three 27" flatscreens worth and typically multitask on separate billable activities. Sorting that **** out by hand takes too long, and BTW, I type at over 110 wpm.

6 mins 18 seconds. So there

Grats.