JM>> Is there nothing you think is good that didn't come from or   
    JM>> was a result of the union?   
      
    BK>  Yeah, public education for one.   
      
   Another failed effort.   
      
      
    BK>>>>>   The representation fees are appropriate because the union has to   
    BK>>>>>   represent you. If the law is changed so the union can let them   
    BK>>>>>   hang you and not lift a finger then your point is valid.   
    BK>>>>>   Otherwise, no.   
      
    JM>>>> Representation fees are the same as extortion.   
      
    BK>>>   Are legal fees the same as extortion?   
      
    JM>> In some cases yes. If a person has been falsely accused and   
    JM>> has to pay legal fees to adequately defend themselves  or   
    JM>> go to jail that's extortion.   
      
    BK>   IOW, anytime an accuser makes a mistake, it leads to extortion?   
      
   I didn't say that.   
      
    BK>   After all, you don't have to pay legal fees, you can represent   
    BK>   yourself.   
      
   I would expect that out of you ; because as you know only a fool would   
   represent himself in Court.,   
      
    JM>>>> WTF is a union going to represent me for?  I don't owe the   
    JM>>>> leaches of a union one thin penny.   
      
    BK>>>   Those who work for you would be much better off if they had   
    BK>>>   unions, now wouldn't they?   
      
    JM>> Not really. My help get's paid well above the local living   
    JM>> wage.   
      
    BK>   So, you admit the living wage can be defined. Thanks.   
      
   No Bob I don't admit a "living wage" can be defined. That was an error on my   
   part to use that term. I should have said the people that work for me make   
   well above the average wage for this area.   
      
   --- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:13.0) Gecko/20120614 Thunderbird/13.   
    * Origin: Fidonet Via Newsreader - http://www.easternstar.info (1:123/789.0)