The truth is a lot of what is being done by government either is already done, or could be done by private charities and community organizations.  And by the way, I donate to SEVERAL of these a year so I don't want to hear any more crap about not paying my "fair share" or not being "patriotic".  I give back to my community in more ways than paying taxes.  I choose to give, and that's what right-to-work is about: CHOICE!!!

Are there people who would want to take advantage of a union negotiated wage if it's higher?  Of course there is.  But should those people be allowed to leave the union if they think with out their wages would be comparable?  Of course.  Should someone be allowed to leave a union if they don't feel like the union is representing them effectively?  YES!!!  And that's what this is about.  What do you have against giving people free choice?

This is what I don't get about you guys Guru.  Why not give people a choice?  If the union is so great, there won't be too many people leaving it anyway, so why not give people a choice?

Unfortunately the Democrats also avoid paying taxes - the dems collect their Social Security (another welfare program started by yet another welfare-centric democrat), use Medicaid, collect their farm subsidies, collect workers' compensation, collect unemployment (expecially in Michigan due to the failed policies of one Jennifer Granholm), drive on our highways, play in the parks, and rely on municipal services.

And all of this from someone who "spent 20 years fighting communism in the military" and you are now drawing a monthly retirement check from the military.

And you're planning on collecting Social Security, too?

And maybe you're also trying to build up another retirement income?

Let's say your little bookstore selling democrat propaganda is failing and your clerks are unionized, are you going to start telling your customers that they'll have to start paying double the marked price on the books because you're not a particularly astute business person?

Dumb question - you will, of course.

And maybe the mindless people who come to your little bookstore will pay the increase to cover the "union tax" and more.

I agree 100 percent with you that there are some things I don't like paying for in government, too, but doesn't our input come when we choose who represents us in Congress? All those things you talk about, like fixing roads and bridges and financial aid for college, costs money, so we have to pay for them. Now, the other stuff you talk about, like Cool Cities and staffers in the Governor's spouse's office, you may disagree with but I and others don't. How is it fair to withhold money for something you disagree with but I don't? To me, the tax issue and union issues are exactly the same.

I apologize of saying you don't want to pay your fair share and do your patriotic duty by paying taxes, but I believe its true. Paying taxes is the most basic patriotic duty. Private charities are great. They do an excellent job of helping people in temporary need, but they have never paid for police protection, repaired a road or helped put a middle class kid through college.

It's a lot more than "Are there people who would want to take advantage of a union negotiated wage if it's higher?" Unions raised the standard of living for all workers, and they put in place safety rules that saved the lives of thousands of workers. They also created the middle class. Do you disagree with that? You may feel personally that this is about free choice, but this is a concerted effort to break unions. If you feel the union is not properly representing you, you can vote for other union leaders to represent you or even petition for another bargaining unit to represent you. If I don't like whom the President is does that mean I can withdrew from the country?

The fact is even if you are not part of the union, they still represent you. How is that fair? It's like being part of a homeowners association where all the homeowners pay dues to keep up the common areas, such as parks and roads. But I refuse to be a member, but I still use the common areas.

I really don't know that people are leaving unions. I have never been part of a union, but I wish I had or was. Over the years the way I have seen workers treated proves to me we certainly needed one. To expect corporations to treat workers with respect and treat them fairly is a fantasy.

Yes, unfortunately, some Democrats also avoid paying taxes.  Yes, "Democrats collect their Social Security, use Medicaid, collect their farm subsidies, collect workers' compensation, collect unemployment, drive on our highways, play in the parks, and rely on municipal services." I don't see the point of that statement. Democrats are not advocating cutting more spending. We are advocating increasing revenues to pay for these useful programs that benefit just about every single American.

Yes, I am collecting a pension from the military. I earned it. I will also be collecting Social Security when I really retire. I have been paying Social Security taxes since I was 15 years old. I don't see anything wrong with that collecting on the insurance policy I paid for and supported for all of my working life.

Can you TRULY believe that???????

You "fought communism in the military for 20 years" to protect our basic patriotic duty to pay taxes. That was an incredible waste of 20 years - and you "earned" a retirement check for THAT?

"If you feel the union is not properly representing you, you can vote for other union leaders to represent you or even petition for another bargaining unit to represent you." Why can't a person just be allowed to opt-out of the union? It's a matter of personal freedom. Silly me, though, democrats believe in "the common good". Actually, they believe in forcing everyone to think and act as they do.

"If I don't like whom the President is does that mean I can withdrew from the country?" Sure - Sweden is waiting with open arms for you. France, Germany, Russia, many other places.

"The fact is even if you are not part of the union, they still represent you." You've never been a part of a union - so how do you KNOW they still represent those who aren't members. They may SAY the represent - but how WELL do they represent?

"Over the years the way I have seen workers treated proves to me we certainly needed one." You needed one during those 20 years you "fought communism in the military" - must have been a rough time for you.

"To expect corporations to treat workers with respect and treat them fairly is a fantasy." Another chapter from the 21st Communist Manifest.

"Yes, unfortunately, some Democrats also avoid paying taxes."  Not SOME but MANY.

"Yes, 'Democrats collect their Social Security, use Medicaid, collect their farm subsidies, collect workers' compensation, collect unemployment, drive on our highways, play in the parks, and rely on municipal services.' I don't see the point of that statement." I didn't see the point you were trying to make in your claim, either.

"Democrats are not advocating cutting more spending. We are advocating increasing revenues to pay for these useful programs that benefit just about every single American." AND way too many programs that are out-dated, obsolete, and entirely wasteful.

"Yes, I am collecting a pension from the military. I earned it. I will also be collecting Social Security when I really retire. I have been paying Social Security taxes since I was 15 years old. I don't see anything wrong with that collecting on the insurance policy I paid for and supported for all of my working life." I pointed that out because you made it sound like you were above all that!

Secondly, Guru, you need understand what unions have really created.

1.) Fat cat bosses who have little interests beyond lining their own pockets.

2.) Wage negotiations that allowed my neighbor to work for Chrysler for 15 years and make $42,000.00 a year.  What did he do?  Yeah, he screwed in the light bulbs in glove compartments.  I'm sure he did his job well and I'm sure he worked hard, but can you expect Chrysler to pay some one like this $42,000.00 a year and still remain competitive?

3.) An entitlement society where the "middle class" can sit in "jobs banks" allowing them to collect a pay check for doing NO work.

4.) Protecting jobs that could be done more effciently by technological advancements like machines and computers (again, this goes to competitiveness).

Have they done some good things along the way?  I guess so, but I didn't see them in my four years in a union.  You wanted to be in a union so badly, but I can tell you, based on what I saw, you're not missing much.

The basic point is that unions have hand-cuffed companies into promises they can't keep with wages and benefits.  Would I love to live in a world where a hot dog vendor can make $350,000.00 a year and a auto mechanic can make seven figures?  Sure.  Is it realistic?  No.  And that's what's happening out there.  People get harassed and sometimes beaten for what I'm about to say, but the truth is the unions have forced the big 3 to over pay many of their employees.  And now, it has all caught up to the big 3 and they're trying to tell the unions that the gravy train has made it's last stop.

The point here is that if there were some employees that weren't unionized, the big 3 could have made moves years ago before many of the problems they're facing came to fruition.

You claim that unions represent everyone, even those who aren't in unions.  I would like to know from where you draw that logic.  Do you have an example?  A hypothetical situation?

You say that if I don't like the way a union is representing me, I can get a new union to represent me, as if they're required.  Why not abolish it if it no longer serves its purpose.  And I've got bad news, a lot of them no longer do.  You can argue that during the Delphi negotiations, the unions protected workers from just being sent packing by Delphi.  But I will counter that if it weren't for the deals the unions strong armed Delphi into in the first place, the Delphi negotations would not have ever been necessary because the problem would have already been dealt with.

You say that companies treating their employees with dignity and respect is a fantasy?  That's absolute crap and that statement itself demonstrates how little knowledge you have of economics.  The strength of capitalism (as I've alluded to countless times in this exchange) is competition.  In order to compete effectively, you need the most effective employees.  To get the most effective employees you have to keep them happy.  That means paying them well, providing good benefits and an excellent working environment.  Companies will govern themselves, and when they don't, the hear about it.  That's why the government has a Department of Labor and that's why we have labor laws in this country.  By the way, I already pay taxes for those right?  So why am I paying union taxes on top of it?  Why is a union necessary to keep companies honest?  Pay your employees well, but not more than you can afford to pay them.  It's a good rule to not break and the unions forced the big 3 to break it.

Really when it comes down to this, unions propose measures that end up hurting companies.  Look at ergonomics.  In 2006, unions try to ram a bill through the Michigan legislature that would force companies to refit all their equipment to make it ergonomically safe.  The Republican majority then correctly made the point that the costs for companies to refit all their equipment to abide by the new law would be a burden on business and cost people their jobs.

The Democratic response?  The bill is economically friendly because ergonomic equipment would save companies on medical expenses.  I'm willing to buy that, but if a company knows they're going to save money by doing it, wouldn't they do it themselves when they could afford to?

Unions and Democrats need to realize that they cannot run corporations better than the corporations themselves by micro-managing everything that is done (CAFE standards anybody?).  It is of the higher arrogance to think so.