1 - 6
In response to:

School for Scandal

MB43 Wrote: Apr 04, 2013 12:53 PM
schools have the children for 6 hours a day, 5 days a week, for 13 years. ...Do you think the schools might have just a little something to do with educational outcomes?
regularly. i know more about the Times than you do about TH. If you want to defend the ridiculous Times article be bold enough to defend a specific point.
As it stands now, US labor and public sector unions drive up prices for American consumers. They interfere with free people's right to do business. They block other people from getting jobs, generating unemployment and the attendant costs and problems. And, they've wrecked our manufacturing base. The only ones benefiting from the current union laws are the top layer of union leadership and the public sector officials who secure perks and power catering to them. Unions are the US citizen's biggest enemy and China's best friend.
The right to unionize is not the issue. Workers should indeed have the right to unionize. But, employers should have the right to tell them to go pound sand. And other employees should have the right to not join. Unions don't want equal rights. They want to force people to join. They want to force employers to bargain with them. They want laws mandating that only union shops can bid on certain contracts. At the same time they want downside protection (as in the GM case.) Right now they enjoy these unequal protections so they'll threaten, bribe, bully, and (in cases like this) use violence to keep them.
"...i now think the majority are for gay marriage" Possibly. Although why do people vote against it--time after time after time--when it comes up on the ballot? Are they Al Gore voters? ...Too dimwitted to figure out the complexities of a ballot?
In response to:

Stubborn Ignorance

MB43 Wrote: Jul 30, 2012 4:33 PM
Uh no. That's not what he's saying. It's actually the other way around. Let's take your drunk-driving/accident example and apply EEOC logic. It would go like this: "Drunk drivers have caused car accidents. Ergo...if there is ever a car accident, then it MUST be because the participants were drunk. In our reasoning, there can be no other explanation for the event. Thus, our policy will be to automatically assume every person in every car accident is a drunk driver. They're criminals. We'll show up, charge them, and leave it to them to incur the costs of lawsuits and go through pleading contortions to show that they weren't drinking."
1 - 6