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.   
      
    JM> Another failed effort.   
      
    US public education was among the best in the world, until the   
    right wing decided to destroy it. After about three decades of   
    trashing public education the right wing has come some way   
    toward accomplishing their goal.   
      
    However, the facts show that public education in this country   
    actually serves the majority of the students better than the   
    private schools. The greatest reason is, 90% of the students are   
    in public schools, and the private schools can't begin to handle   
    that number.   
      
    Even counting those in private schools, there are public school   
    systems that match their performance, or exceed it. The   
    financial status of the parents has more to do with the students   
    achievement than whether they are in private or public schools.   
    Public schools in well to do districts often outperform the   
    private school systems.   
      
    ...   
      
    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?   
      
    JM> I didn't say that.   
      
    Then your comment doesn't mean much. It would only apply when   
    the accuser is deliberately falsely accusing the defendant.   
    Which would also apply to union representation. It would only be   
    extortion, by your rules, when the company is falsely trying to   
    punish you. However, since the union is there to protect you   
    against the company, then union representation fees would not   
    even be extortion then.   
      
    BK>>   After all, you don't have to pay legal fees, you can represent   
    BK>>   yourself.   
      
    JM> I would expect that out of you ; because as you know only a   
    JM> fool would represent himself in Court.,   
      
    Only a fool would represent himself, if he could afford a   
    lawyer. Many have had to defend themselves when they can't   
    afford a lawyer. The public defender doesn't always represent   
    you in an appeal.   
      
    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.   
      
    JM> No Bob I don't admit a "living wage" can be defined. That   
    JM> was an error on my part to use that term. I should have   
    JM> said the people that work for me make well above the   
    JM> average wage for this area.   
      
    IOW, they would still probably be better off if that was a union   
    state.   
      
      
   BOB KLAHN bob.klahn@sev.org   http://home.toltbbs.com/bobklahn   
      
   ... The Apathy Anonymous meeting was cancelled due to lack of interest.   
   --- Via Silver Xpress V4.5/P [Reg]   
    * Origin: Fidonet Since 1991 And Still Here. Join Us: www.DocsPl (1:123/140)