Johnny K making a solid comeback.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2012/09/28/gov-john-kasich-makes-a-comeback-in-ohio/

According to the Post poll, 52 percent of registered Ohio voters now approve of Kasich’s job performance, compared to 37 percent who disapprove. His splits are even better — 56 percent positive and 31 percent negative — among independents.

Those are Kasich’s best numbers in any poll since his inauguration in January 2011, and they are essentially reversed from mid-2011, when some polls showed his approval rating stuck in the low 30s.
Other polls have shown Kasich making a similar turnaround in recent weeks — including a CBS News/New York Times/Quinnipiac University poll that showed 48 percent approving of Kasich and 35 percent disapproving.

isadore;1331792 wrote:112 die in fire in factory in bangladesh. wow a tragedy that cann't happen here. and gosh we need to protect the rights of the rich and the corporations against all those rules and regulations that protect those pampered workers.
well it can happen here, 101 years ago, the triangle shirtwaist factory fire, 146 killed mostly young women because businesses were not tied down by regulations.
Who put those regulations to prevent a repeat of that fire, union pressure on government, not corporations, not the rich but the representatives of the workers there to prevent young.

I swear your reading comprehension level is around the 3rd grade.

Everyone on here has said that unions were most definitely needed up until the last couple decades. Most definitely 100 freaking years ago our labor laws were terrible and needed the help of unions. NO ONE has denied that.

What we have said is that in the 2000s (you know, NOW) the unions are more the reason jobs are outsourced than they actually protecting workers safety.

jmog;1332439 wrote:I swear your reading comprehension level is around the 3rd grade.

Everyone on here has said that unions were most definitely needed up until the last couple decades. Most definitely 100 freaking years ago our labor laws were terrible and needed the help of unions. NO ONE has denied that.

What we have said is that in the 2000s (you know, NOW) the unions are more the reason jobs are outsourced than they actually protecting workers safety.

gosh a ruddies we see the American corporations are very willing to exploit workers to make a profit, in fact burn them alive for a profit.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2012/11/28/bangladesh-fire-walmart-disney-sears/1731225/
"Wal-Mart, Disney, Sears used Bangladesh factory in fire"
and they try to roll back worker protection in America through the efforts of ALEC and the Republican party.
As with 100 years ago who is there to protect the American worker, the unions.

isadore;1332482 wrote:gosh a ruddies we see the American corporations are very willing to exploit workers to make a profit, in fact burn them alive for a profit.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2012/11/28/bangladesh-fire-walmart-disney-sears/1731225/
"Wal-Mart, Disney, Sears used Bangladesh factory in fire"
and they try to roll back worker protection in America through the efforts of ALEC and the Republican party.
As with 100 years ago who is there to protect the American worker, the unions.

Actually OHSA and current labor laws protect the American worker, not a union. Unions now, as I have worked around MANY unions, are more about higher benefits, higher pay,and filing grievances because someone that was non-union tightened a bolt with a wrench. They hardly ever issue anything with regards to workers safety.

Actually, 99% of the time, worker safety and training programs are instituted from the companies management because of current OSHA and labor law guidelines (plus, to be honest, due to the current tax laws, safety training for workers is a tax write off).

jmog;1332516 wrote:Actually OHSA and current labor laws protect the American worker, not a union. Unions now, as I have worked around MANY unions, are more about higher benefits, higher pay,and filing grievances because someone that was non-union tightened a bolt with a wrench. They hardly ever issue anything with regards to workers safety.

Actually, 99% of the time, worker safety and training programs are instituted from the companies management because of current OSHA and labor law guidelines (plus, to be honest, due to the current tax laws, safety training for workers is a tax write off).

Quit with your facts.

jmog;1332516 wrote:Actually OHSA and current labor laws protect the American worker, not a union. Unions now, as I have worked around MANY unions, are more about higher benefits, higher pay,and filing grievances because someone that was non-union tightened a bolt with a wrench. They hardly ever issue anything with regards to workers safety.

Actually, 99% of the time, worker safety and training programs are instituted from the companies management because of current OSHA and labor law guidelines (plus, to be honest, due to the current tax laws, safety training for workers is a tax write off).

The OHSA exists because of labor unions. Companies, their lobbyist, their pacs, ALEC work to undo these protections. The reason as you say that companies establish safety policies is because of “current OHSA and labor law guidelines” An organization and laws that exist because of labor union.
I have worked in factories where the unions pushed the companies to protect the workers. I have been in other union situations where the unions pushed the employers to protect workers safety and from abuse.

isadore;1332534 wrote:The OHSA exists because of labor unions. Companies, their lobbyist, their pacs, ALEC work to undo these protections. The reason as you say that companies establish safety policies is because of “current OHSA and labor law guidelines” An organization and laws that exist because of labor union.
I have worked in factories where the unions pushed the companies to protect the workers. I have been in other union situations where the unions pushed the employers to protect workers safety and from abuse.

Please show me proof that companies are trying to abolish OSHA, if you can't you fail once again.

If anything companies would want to abolish the EPA first as it costs companies more money than OSHA does.

jmog;1332556 wrote:Please show me proof that companies are trying to abolish OSHA, if you can't you fail once again.

If anything companies would want to abolish the EPA first as it costs companies more money than OSHA does.

A few examples
http://www.irle.ucla.edu/publications/documents/ResearchBrief8.pdf

http://walmart1percent.org/2012/09/11/walmart-and-the-walton-family-making-your-workplace-less-safe/
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/04/25/1086231/-End-the-Delays-Deadly-to-Workers

http://teamsternation.blogspot.com/2012/08/teamsters-expose-chemical-companys-osha.html

isadore;1332816 wrote:A few examples
http://www.irle.ucla.edu/publications/documents/ResearchBrief8.pdf

http://walmart1percent.org/2012/09/11/walmart-and-the-walton-family-making-your-workplace-less-safe/
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/04/25/1086231/-End-the-Delays-Deadly-to-Workers

http://teamsternation.blogspot.com/2012/08/teamsters-expose-chemical-companys-osha.html

The first one said over and over again "some businesses" and "some politicians" and "some republicans".

No where did it say "company X's CEO John Smith said...." or Republican Senator Y said "...."

It was basically a history lesson with some opinion thrown in.

The last one I'm not even going to open as it is a blog from a union site, in other words full of biased opinion.

The Walmart one was interesting but no where has Walmart tried to abolish OSHA (which I stated you needed to prove) it just showed that Walmart funds politicians who don't agree that we need MORE regulations. None of those said politicians voted to abolish or defund OSHA.

The 3rd one was similar to the Walmart one, so again you have failed to prove your point. Instead you either list opinion blogs (laughable) or make the jump from when someone doesn't want MORE regulations that somehow means they want to abolish all current safety regulations. That is a logical assumption failure.

gosh a ruddies none are so blind as those who will not see, or in your case who do not want to see.
"Today corporate and business leaders argue that safety and health regulations areunnecessary and damaging to business. Indeed, as Congress debates the budgetfor the 2011‐12 fiscal year, Republicans have proposed cuts of nearly 20 percentto the agency. The proposals include cuts to federal and state enforcementactivities, development of safety and health standards, and collection of safetyand health statistics." republicans and corporations trying to gut protection for workers. that is why we need unions.

isadore;1332844 wrote:gosh a ruddies none are so blind as those who will not see, or in your case who do not want to see.
"Today corporate and business leaders argue that safety and health regulations areunnecessary and damaging to business. Indeed, as Congress debates the budgetfor the 2011‐12 fiscal year, Republicans have proposed cuts of nearly 20 percentto the agency. The proposals include cuts to federal and state enforcementactivities, development of safety and health standards, and collection of safetyand health statistics." republicans and corporations trying to gut protection for workers. that is why we need unions.

I read that part, it mentioned no specific company and not a single congressman or senator that proposed such a thing.

I could say "the democrats tried to kill rich people" but unless I show a specific bill that was brought up by a democrat that tried to make it legal to kill rich people, then I would be stating my view or my opinion and not stating facts.

Pretty much the whole congressional delegation
http://www.nsc.org/safetyhealth/Pages/SolisRepublicanbudgetplanmayresultin%E2%80%98moreinjuries%E2%80%99_2.16.11.aspx
http://www.paintsquare.com/news/?fuseaction=view&id=5235
http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/04/21/173909/osha-gop-revolutionary/?mobile=nc
and gosh a ruddies if you want one specific example, paulryan and his plan will cut 19% from osha and worker protection.
http://cdn.thecongressionalblackcaucus.com/wp-content/uploads/2013-Ryan-Budget-Proposal-Program-Impacts.pdf

gut;1325643 wrote:Yep, got us heading deeper into it.

Nope he just drove into a bigger hole:thumbup:

Classyposter58;1332967 wrote:Nope he just drove into a bigger hole:thumbup:

Sad that some people on here seem to be avocating against the right of employees to colectively bargin. You are not in very good historic company if this is what you are saying. If you are a worker and do not like your union, than get another or chose not to be a member. It's as simple as that.

Bigdogg;1333508 wrote:Sad that some people on here seem to be avocating against the right of employees to colectively bargin. You are not in very good historic company if this is what you are saying. If you are a worker and do not like your union, than get another or chose not to be a member. It's as simple as that.

I'm a teamster and I'm saying Obama drove us into a bigger hole. As for public union employees, those people aren't getting raises anymore basically, why take away all of their rights? In 10 years they'll be s*** paying jobs

Classyposter58;1333872 wrote:I'm a teamster and I'm saying Obama drove us into a bigger hole. As for public union employees, those people aren't getting raises anymore basically, why take away all of their rights? In 10 years they'll be s*** paying jobs

I love the assumption that if unions are out of the equation, all public employee salaries will be slashed. Fallacy.

it is not a fallacy. republican method to balance budgets so they can give tax breaks to the rich and corporations.

isadore;1333976 wrote:it is not a fallacy. republican method to balance budgets so they can give tax breaks to the rich and corporations.

Just stop. You have no clue.

gosh a ruddies when kasich pushed sb5 he was pushing a budget with tax cuts favoring the corporations and rich. same for walker in wisconsin.

isadore;1333989 wrote:gosh a ruddies when kasich pushed sb5 he was pushing a budget with tax cuts favoring the corporations and rich. same for walker in wisconsin.

Nothing in SB5 addressed salary reductions for currently employed public employees. Fallacy.

WebFire;1333998 wrote:Nothing in SB5 addressed salary reductions for currently employed public employees. Fallacy.

lol that is what sb5 was all about, taking union power away so you could slash wages.

isadore;1334012 wrote:lol that is what sb5 was all about, taking union power away so you could slash wages.

Fallacy.

Ignorance.

some self realization on your part to confess your ignorance. a possible slim ray of hope for you.

isadore;1334038 wrote:some self realization on your part to confess your ignorance. a possible slim ray of hope for you.

I just truly hope "isadore" is a character on the OC and not a person who thinks like this in real life.