Gun control debate (merged)

You must have missed the part where the companies controlled the real estate market (aka bought up all the farms for mineral rights and established company housing), controlled all transportation and logistics, the general stores and grocers, and paid their employees in company notes that could only be used at company stores (fixing prices for more profit and disallowing any kind of savings or wealth building opportunities).
So they paid people for their land. If they didn't take it by force then what's the argument? How did they force people to work for them? My dad's side of the family is from coal country and he's the only one that worked at a mine and that was when he was a teenager. He joined the NG and got out via an education. The people that thought they had no choice but to work in a company town were exactly right.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rickyvol77
Aren't they just forcing their concept of fair wages/benefits/conditions on others? Seems very artificial
The employer was forcing their concept of fair compensation on the employees too, and the employees are rejecting it and using their collective power to get what they desire.
 
Yes, if they are trying to negotiate for fair wages/benefits/conditions.

Unfettered...as long as a conditional qualifications established by you is met. Doesn't sound unfettered to me. Sounds more like your definition varies depending on the circumstances.

Do these also meet your approval:
It isn't rape if she is asking for it.
It isn't stealing if I am hungry.
It isn't infidelity if she doesn't find out.
 
So they paid people for their land. If they didn't take it by force then what's the argument? How did they force people to work for them? My dad's side of the family is from coal country and he's the only one that worked at a mine and that was when he was a teenager. He joined the NG and got out via an education. The people that thought they had no choice but to work in a company town were exactly right.
You haven’t seen any early 20th century time pieces have you?
 
The employer was forcing their concept of fair compensation on the employees too, and the employees are rejecting it and using their collective power to get what they desire.
By taking over control and eliminating any individual choice? How very authoritarian of those who have little skin in the game
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rickyvol77
The employer was forcing their concept of fair compensation on the employees too, and the employees are rejecting it and using their collective power to get what they desire.

But if a union employee feels they are getting what they desire from the company and continue to work during a lockout they can be punished by the union?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rickyvol77
So they paid people for their land. If they didn't take it by force then what's the argument? How did they force people to work for them? My dad's side of the family is from coal country and he's the only one that worked at a mine and that was when he was a teenager. He joined the NG and got out via an education. The people that thought they had no choice but to work in a company town were exactly right.
Well, your dad’s age matters a lot in this context. Did he grow up there before or after unions existed?
 
I have an agreement with OH up until a point. I would have no problems with unionized employees passing our pamphlets or have civil conversations with other employees about the reality of working at a company. Give the new hire a perspective from both the employer and the employee.
I draw the line at intimidation, harassment, destruction of property, and personal harm. If the company is such an awful place to make a living, there should be no need for these mob tactics.
 
Advertisement





Back
Top