"Dave Hall" wrote in message
...


My friend Bob must be a sick man. He's a union butcher. He works 10 hour
days because he loves dealing with the public at the store I shop in.
But,
he's probably the only union employee in the known universe who's like
that.
Right, Dave?


Use your head Doug. Union membership is MANDATORY in many businesses
(Gee, I wonder why?). Not all union members take advantage of the
system to slack off.

Good. I just wanted to be sure you understood that. I thought maybe you were
making another one of your exquisitely stupid absolute statements.


But that does not negate the fact that a great
many do. Union rules are made to benefit those who don't aspire to be
the very best that they can be.

All union rules? Do you know why they came to exist initially?


In other words they are protectionist,
and foster an attitude of mediocrity.

All union rules are protectionist? What about rules regarding safety and
working conditions? Be careful here, Dave. Your response may make you a
target for "ad puer" (not "ad hominem") remarks.

On Fri, 16 Jan 2004 15:05:00 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:

"Dave Hall" wrote in message
.. .


My friend Bob must be a sick man. He's a union butcher. He works 10 hour
days because he loves dealing with the public at the store I shop in.
But,
he's probably the only union employee in the known universe who's like
that.
Right, Dave?


Use your head Doug. Union membership is MANDATORY in many businesses
(Gee, I wonder why?). Not all union members take advantage of the
system to slack off.

Good. I just wanted to be sure you understood that. I thought maybe you were
making another one of your exquisitely stupid absolute statements.

I've told you before, I don't deal in absolutes. Far too few of them
can be proven either one way or another.



But that does not negate the fact that a great
many do. Union rules are made to benefit those who don't aspire to be
the very best that they can be.

All union rules?

Who said anything about *all* rules? There you go again assuming an
absolute and then attributing the claim to me.


Do you know why they came to exist initially?

Sure, and most of those reasons are long gone.




In other words they are protectionist,
and foster an attitude of mediocrity.

All union rules are protectionist?

There you go again. Can't you contemplate an issue without going to
absolute extremes?


What about rules regarding safety and
working conditions?

What about them? They are no better than those mandated by OSHA.


Dave

"Dave Hall" wrote in message
...


But that does not negate the fact that a great
many do. Union rules are made to benefit those who don't aspire to be
the very best that they can be.

All union rules?

Who said anything about *all* rules? There you go again assuming an
absolute and then attributing the claim to me.

You said "Union rules are made to benefit......". You did not say "some", "a
few", etc. Sounds like you meant "all", until you were pushed to the wall
and forced to recant.


Do you know why they came to exist initially?

Sure, and most of those reasons are long gone.

Really? Are you sure you might not want to spend some time doing research
this weekend, so you can come back and recant that statement, too? Here's a
teaser for you, but there are plenty more out there, and recent ones, too.
http://www.labornotes.org/archives/1999/0499/0499b.html


In other words they are protectionist,
and foster an attitude of mediocrity.

All union rules are protectionist?

There you go again. Can't you contemplate an issue without going to
absolute extremes?

You said "...they are protectionist....". You did not modify your statement
with other words like "some". You are now recanting your statement.


What about rules regarding safety and
working conditions?

What about them? They are no better than those mandated by OSHA.

In cases where a union gets written legal agreements for certain safety
standards, they establish a system of recourse that holds up in court. This
is often more effective than waiting for OSHA, a beaurocracy, to offer an
opinion.

On Fri, 16 Jan 2004 17:12:17 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:

"Dave Hall" wrote in message
.. .


But that does not negate the fact that a great
many do. Union rules are made to benefit those who don't aspire to be
the very best that they can be.

All union rules?

Who said anything about *all* rules? There you go again assuming an
absolute and then attributing the claim to me.

You said "Union rules are made to benefit......". You did not say "some", "a
few", etc. Sounds like you meant "all", until you were pushed to the wall
and forced to recant.

I've recanted nothing. I've just corrected your misinterpretation.




Do you know why they came to exist initially?

Sure, and most of those reasons are long gone.

Really? Are you sure you might not want to spend some time doing research
this weekend, so you can come back and recant that statement, too? Here's a
teaser for you, but there are plenty more out there, and recent ones, too.
http://www.labornotes.org/archives/1999/0499/0499b.html

Sigh. Another wonderful website. If I put up a website which said that
the moon was made of green cheese, would you believe that too?


In other words they are protectionist,
and foster an attitude of mediocrity.

All union rules are protectionist?

There you go again. Can't you contemplate an issue without going to
absolute extremes?

You said "...they are protectionist....". You did not modify your statement
with other words like "some". You are now recanting your statement.

No, I'm correcting you.


What about rules regarding safety and
working conditions?

What about them? They are no better than those mandated by OSHA.

In cases where a union gets written legal agreements for certain safety
standards, they establish a system of recourse that holds up in court. This
is often more effective than waiting for OSHA, a beaurocracy, to offer an
opinion.

What? You mean the government isn't the most efficient and effective
at promoting and enforcing policies?

Gee, what a concept.....

Dave

Dave Hall wrote in message . ..

Is there any point to your mindless pseudo-conservative prattle here,
fellow?

You almost make me ashamed to be a conservative.

You are about as disconnected from the real world as anyone I have
noticed in newsgroups, and, worse, you post incessantly about almost
nothing.

Get a life.

On 19 Jan 2004 06:26:04 -0800, (Mad
Dog Dave) wrote:

Dave Hall wrote in message . ..

Is there any point to your mindless pseudo-conservative prattle here,
fellow?

Yes, correcting the misconceptions of those on the left, who can't see
the forest for the trees.


You almost make me ashamed to be a conservative.

You should be, if you take the side of the left opposed to that of
common sense and logic.


You are about as disconnected from the real world as anyone I have
noticed in newsgroups, and, worse, you post incessantly about almost
nothing.

I'd be glad to engage you on any topic you feel passionately about.
Get ready to have your boat rocked.


Get a life.

Touch a nerve? I normally get that reaction when I hit a little too
close to home with most liberals.

Your more than welcome to prove my "prattle" wrong with any hard
evidence that you may have.

Dave

"Dave Hall" wrote in message
...


Your more than welcome to prove my "prattle" wrong with any hard
evidence that you may have.

Dave



That's the paradox. It's next to impossible to disprove prattle.

Dave Hall wrote in message . ..
On 19 Jan 2004 06:26:04 -0800, (Mad
Dog Dave) wrote:

Dave Hall wrote in message . ..

Is there any point to your mindless pseudo-conservative prattle here,
fellow?

Yes, correcting the misconceptions of those on the left, who can't see
the forest for the trees.

Jesus, as a conservative who actually is a conservative, and not a
right-wing robot, my response to you would be that you cannot see the
forest or the trees.
Your posts read as if you were kidnapped by christian fundamentalists
and held until your only thoughts were their thoughts.




You almost make me ashamed to be a conservative.

You should be, if you take the side of the left opposed to that of
common sense and logic.

The world is not black or white.





You are about as disconnected from the real world as anyone I have
noticed in newsgroups, and, worse, you post incessantly about almost
nothing.

I'd be glad to engage you on any topic you feel passionately about.
Get ready to have your boat rocked.

I've read your posts; you couldn't rock a paper match afloat on a sea
of spit.
There is absolutely nothing original in anything you post here.





Get a life.

Touch a nerve? I normally get that reaction when I hit a little too
close to home with most liberals.

Self praise stinks.




Your more than welcome to prove my "prattle" wrong with any hard
evidence that you may have.

Dave

Prove prattle wrong? Playing with prattle is your game, not mine.