quote:

Would you also say the employer cannot hire strictly Baptists if that is what the union negotiated?

quote:

Koch Industries, Inc. (/ˈkoʊk/) is an American private energy conglomerate based in Wichita, Kansas, with subsidiaries involved in manufacturing, trading and investments. Koch also owns Invista, Georgia-Pacific, Flint Hills Resources, Koch Pipeline, Koch Fertilizer, Koch Minerals and Matador Cattle Company. The firm employs 50,000 people in the United States and another 20,000 in 59 other countries.[3]

In 2008, Forbes called it the second largest privately held company in the United States (after Cargill) with an annual revenue of about $98 billion,[5][6][7] down from the largest in 2006. If Koch Industries were a public company in 2007, it would rank about 16 in the Fortune 500.[8]

Fred C. Koch, for whom Koch Industries, Inc. is named, co-founded the company in 1940 and developed an innovative crude oil refining process.[9] His sons, Charles G. Koch, chairman of the board and chief executive officer, and David H. Koch, executive vice president, are principal owners of the company after they bought out their brothers, Frederick and William, for $1.1 billion in 1983.[10] Charles and David H. Koch each own 42% of Koch Industries, and Charles has stated that the company will publicly offer shares "literally over my dead body".[5]

quote:

Koch Industries sponsors various free market foundations and causes, listing Americans for Prosperity and Americans for Prosperity Foundation on its site.[58][not in citation given] The Center for Responsive Politics has said that many of Koch Industries' contributions have gone toward achieving legislation on energy issues, defense appropriations and financial regulatory reform.[59]

From 2005 to 2008, Koch industries spent $5.7 million on political campaigns and $37 million on direct lobbying to support fossil fuel industries.[citation needed] In 2007 Koch Industries became among the first oil firms that lobbied against a national standard for low carbon fuel standard in 2007.[20]

Greenpeace says that between 1997 and 2008 Koch Industries donated nearly $48 million to groups which doubt or oppose the theory of anthropogenic global warming.[60] [61]

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

There is no law prohibiting open shops in states without "right to work" laws. Taft-Hartley expressly outlawed truly closed shops. All unions can do is negotiate for union shops and in some places they even have to let people choose not to join as long as they pay the dues.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

There is simply no way you can make being in favor of "right to work" laws match up to actual libertarianism.

Hey, you're the one who said that the Mercatus Center was a Libertarian think tank. That blue text I posted came straight from the PDF of this study. So I guess that either they're not as "libertarian" as you claim, or else you don't know as much about the varieties of libertarian viewpoints as you think.

Dunno. Beats me which it could be.

K.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

Yeah, I figured you couldn't actually defend the BS you were shoveling.

Yeah, that must be it. First you claim Mercatus is a libertarian think tank. Then you claim their stance isn't libertarian! But you're sure I'm defending it, whatever it is! Heh.

Lissen up, Don. Wrong windmill. I'm not an ideologue. That's your department.

K.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterSlaveLA

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

The ideological assumptions were yours.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterSlaveLA

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

The ideological assumptions were yours.

Oh. Such as....?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

Without commenting on how "realistic" someone might find them to be, here are the factors and weights:

K.

quote:

ORIGINAL: juliaoceania
I do not know how many people come here year after year after year, from other "free states" and complain about it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: juliaoceania

quote:

Laws and regulations come into being in many cases often because people fail to act civily and responsibly...with regard to others, the community, the environment, etc. Unfortunately, common sense is probably the hardest thing in the world to regulate as well as defining and reaching a genaral consensus on what is right, fair and just.

Can they make any regulation without violating my rights btw?

I'm no great fan of rules and regualtions, however I understand that for society to function at least somewhat well, they have to exist.

Would you consider jury courts as is mandated in the constitution or the present day corporations acting as government and the courts supporting them as a major revenue source as they are now?

I love people, do not get me wrong. I think the vast majority of people are swell, but some people have no sense of proportion.

I take the view that your freedom ends at my doorstep, and I mean doorstep figuratively.. If people want to be free to do what they want for the most part, they need to move out into the boonies where they will not be bugging other people with it. If they want a low tax burden, they need to live in an area that does not provide services so that they can fairly say "I do not use this so I am not paying for it".

If you want to live in civilization, you have to be civilized, or you will be penalized for it.

well that is what they do when they set up a penal colony, how will we know which is which?

You have to pay taxes for services.

I did not see in the constitution where they states were authorized to provide consumer services?

Why not send them an invoice like every other corporate business has to do.  you do know that first class cities are corporations do you not? Pay for what you use, this is not the stone age under a king you know!  well then again.

You have to be quiet at night. You have to be more mindful of the pollution you emit. You have to consider others, and if you are a rude mutha fucka, you are not going to be happy or feel free around others.

As far as the gun crap, again, if you want to carry a weapon everywhere you go, you need a conceal and carry permit, or you need to live in the boonies.

What part of the costitution says that?

See, no one cares what you are doing if it doesn't impact them... meaning it doesn't foul their water, their air, or their land. Communities decide how they want to run things for themselves.

And you can gamble in many places in California

quote:

ORIGINAL: popeye1250

Stern, last night on the News they announced that Mayor Tom "Mumbles" Menino ordered the bars in the Garden area closed after the 2nd period of the Bruins playoff game! Gee, so much for "lawfull gathering" or free assembly. The first amendment be damned!

you are not a party to the federal constitution until you hit the 14th amendment that declares you a subject under the sovereign el federali.  There have been several supreme court cases stating you are not a party to the first ten amendments.

Nice huh!

Someone forgot to tell us!


I hope those bar owners sue him for that.
And during the Democratic Convention they had,....."free speech zones", chainlink fences fashioned into cages that they'd lock people into who wanted to protest the convention.

yeh free speech can be found in the articles of confederation and its for the elected officials of your state in congress LOL  Forgot to tell us that too!

Menino has to be "the" dumbest mayor in the country.
And if you want a permit to carry concealed forget it, that's left to the sole discretion of the local police cheifs! And they rarely grant them, so the first and second amendments take a real beating in that state!
My brother-in-laws brother in law had a "permit" for 20 years and all of a sudden the local police chief said he wouldn't renew it so he had to take the cheif to court and of course he won. He's since moved to New Hampshire.
I don't see why anyone should need a "permit" to excercise a right. You don't need a "permit" to vote.

Sure you do!  Stop talking like a sovereign!  you are in competition with the "state" and the aristocracy!  In the US there are 51 Sovereigns!  Sovereigns are Kings!

Start talking like the citizen-subject that you are get on your knees and beg your legislature to vote the way you want LOL

The whole mindset in that state is that "the govt." is there o tell the People what to do and not to *serve* the People!

People simply means "community" aka *MOB* the way they construed it.

The government of this country is vested in the territory and the state sorta just acts like government.

They have it exactly reversed. It's a repressive type of government not a progressive type of government.

Sure you are a citizen-subject!  I mean hell it says so!  Read the 14th!  The alleged people errm People somehow gave the states sovereignty, then like any good sovereign took over!  Now the People, I mean people are under the sovereign as its subject-citizens.  plenty of case law, look at the elks case and dred.

Look at what happened when they wanted to put clean energy wind mills in Cape Cod Bay, Sens Kennedy and Kerry put a stop to it because it would "spoil their view."