Breaking: Wisconsin Supreme Court reinstates Walker’s collective bargaining law

[ExLibris]

Ewwwwww, Lew Rockwell!!! They are just a bunch of kooky libertarians over there. They actually think Ron Paul would be a good President! INsane! Everyone knows that Ron Paul is too old, and too much of an isolationist to be a good president. He should jsut go back to Texas and wait for death to take him.

[/sarcasm]

Economic liberty? Ridiculous! How silly of me listening to scholars from the Mises Institute!

 

[Scott_Lafrance]

Economic liberty? Ridiculous! How silly of me listening to scholars from the Mises Institute!

Austrian School Economics does not fly here mister.

 

[gnjsdad]

Different day, same old nonsense.

If the wonderful and selfless unions had never been created, we would have all been living in a constant Hell being exploited day in and day out. Ridiculous.

Do you accept the following as infallible Church teaching?

305. The Magisterium recognizes the fundamental role played by labour unions, whose existence is connected with the right to form associations or unions to defend the vital interests of workers employed in the various professions. Unions “grew up from the struggle of the workers — workers in general but especially the industrial workers — to protect their just rights vis-à-vis the entrepreneurs and the owners of the means of production”.[667] Such organizations, while pursuing their specific purpose with regard to the common good, are a positive influence for social order and solidarity, and are therefore an indispensable element of social life. The recognition of workers’ rights has always been a difficult problem to resolve because this recognition takes place within complex historical and institutional processes, and still today it remains incomplete. This makes the practice of authentic solidarity among workers more fitting and necessary than ever.

This is a citation from the [Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church](http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/p...e_doc_20060526_compendio-dott-soc_en.html#The importance of unions)

The Church does not take the same view of unions that you do.

ExLibris:

Catholic historian Thomas E. Woods, Jr. has an interesting article on LewRockwell.com.

ExLibris:

lewrockwell.com/woods/woods135.html

I don’t believe the views of Mr Woods or the Austrian School are cited in footnotes of Papal encyclicals on morality and economics

I would rather listen to what the Church herself says about these matters than what some lay historian who dissents from Church teaching has to say.

 

[smichhertz]

A good movie I recommend: “Waiting for Superman” It’s a documentary about how teacher unions are destroying the public school system. I thought it was really good, and fairly criticized the unions while being careful to still support the teachers.

 

[Scott_Lafrance]

Do you accept the following as infallible Church teaching?

305. The Magisterium recognizes the fundamental role played by labour unions, whose existence is connected with the right to form associations or unions to defend the vital interests of workers employed in the various professions. Unions “grew up from the struggle of the workers — workers in general but especially the industrial workers — to protect their just rights vis-à-vis the entrepreneurs and the owners of the means of production”.[667] Such organizations, while pursuing their specific purpose with regard to the common good, are a positive influence for social order and solidarity, and are therefore an indispensable element of social life. The recognition of workers’ rights has always been a difficult problem to resolve because this recognition takes place within complex historical and institutional processes, and still today it remains incomplete. This makes the practice of authentic solidarity among workers more fitting and necessary than ever.

This is a citation from the [Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church](http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/p...e_doc_20060526_compendio-dott-soc_en.html#The importance of unions)

The Church does not take the same view of unions that you do.

I don’t believe the views of Mr Woods or the Austrian School are cited in footnotes of Papal encyclicals on morality and economics

I would rather listen to what the Church herself says about these matters than what some lay historian who dissents from Church teaching has to say.

When I want to learn about matters economic, I will listen to economists. When I want to learn about salvation, I will listen to the Church.

 

[meltzerboy]

Do you accept the following as infallible Church teaching?

305. The Magisterium recognizes the fundamental role played by labour unions, whose existence is connected with the right to form associations or unions to defend the vital interests of workers employed in the various professions. Unions “grew up from the struggle of the workers — workers in general but especially the industrial workers — to protect their just rights vis-à-vis the entrepreneurs and the owners of the means of production”.[667] Such organizations, while pursuing their specific purpose with regard to the common good, are a positive influence for social order and solidarity, and are therefore an indispensable element of social life. The recognition of workers’ rights has always been a difficult problem to resolve because this recognition takes place within complex historical and institutional processes, and still today it remains incomplete. This makes the practice of authentic solidarity among workers more fitting and necessary than ever.

This is a citation from the [Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church](http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/p...e_doc_20060526_compendio-dott-soc_en.html#The importance of unions)

The Church does not take the same view of unions that you do.

I don’t believe the views of Mr Woods or the Austrian School are cited in footnotes of Papal encyclicals on morality and economics

I would rather listen to what the Church herself says about these matters than what some lay historian who dissents from Church teaching has to say.

I would bet that Pope John Paul II knew a thing or two about the importance of labor unions.

 

[meltzerboy]

When I want to learn about matters economic, I will listen to economists. When I want to learn about salvation, I will listen to the Church.

Really? And when you want to learn about biological processes and changes, do you listen to Darwin and other evolutionary scientists?

 

[Scott_Lafrance]

Do you accept the following as infallible Church teaching?

305. The Magisterium recognizes the fundamental role played by labour unions, whose existence is connected with the right to form associations or unions to defend the vital interests of workers employed in the various professions. Unions “grew up from the struggle of the workers — workers in general but especially the industrial workers — to protect their just rights vis-à-vis the entrepreneurs and the owners of the means of production”.[667] Such organizations, while pursuing their specific purpose with regard to the common good, are a positive influence for social order and solidarity, and are therefore an indispensable element of social life. The recognition of workers’ rights has always been a difficult problem to resolve because this recognition takes place within complex historical and institutional processes, and still today it remains incomplete. This makes the practice of authentic solidarity among workers more fitting and necessary than ever.

This is a citation from the [Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church](http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/p...e_doc_20060526_compendio-dott-soc_en.html#The importance of unions)

The Church does not take the same view of unions that you do.

I don’t believe the views of Mr Woods or the Austrian School are cited in footnotes of Papal encyclicals on morality and economics

I would rather listen to what the Church herself says about these matters than what some lay historian who dissents from Church teaching has to say.

Here is a papal encyclical that bears repeating:

WASHINGTON (CNS) – When Pope Benedict XVI released his third encyclical – “Caritas in Veritate” (“Charity in Truth”) – he stressed that the voice of workers must be heard as heads of state, industry moguls, labor union leaders and environmentalists develop long-term solutions for the ailing global economy.

The pope’s encyclical – released in early July – re-emphasizes the Catholic Church’s continuing support of workers associations going back to Pope Leo XIII’s encyclical, “Rerum Novarum,” in 1891, but it also challenges labor union leaders to adapt to a growing global economy to remain relevant.

According to John Carr, executive director of the Department of Justice, Peace and Human Development at the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, the pope’s encyclical says a healthy economy depends on workers who earn a sustainable wage, receive reliable health benefits and have a safe environment in which to perform their jobs.

“Pope Benedict, like earlier popes, thinks labor unions are a big part of the solution,” Carr told Catholic News Service.

**The encyclical encourages a strong voice for labor to balance the authority of management in the global economy – a give-and-take system expected to achieve long-term financial security.

**“What Benedict says is we need moral individuals and we need ethical structures. It’s not an either-or,” Carr said. "In some ways, the most important word in this encyclical is ‘and.’

Pope Benedict, while making a strong case for the worth of labor unions, declares that THEY need to be willing to bend, compromise, and give as well as who they are negotiating with. That is the problem with many of these unions, the take and once they have, are completely unwilling to reexamine their position in the interests of the 'greater good of the human family".

 

[ExLibris]

Another quote from the Compendium.

Being first of all instruments of solidarity and justice, unions may not misuse the tools of contention; because of what they are called to do, they must overcome the temptation of believing that all workers should be union-members, they must be capable of self-regulation and be able to evaluate the consequences that their decisions will have on the common good.[670]

The article I linked to spoke of freedom of contract and association, or freedom to work, which the Pope supported

And, it’s worth noting, I never said to get rid of the unions. Unions need to be held accountable for their misdeeds like any other group.

Unions do not, however, have the character of “political parties” struggling for power, and they should not be forced to submit to the decisions of political parties nor be too closely linked to them. “In such a situation they easily lose contact with their specific role, which is to secure the just rights of workers within the framework of the common good of the whole of society; instead they become an instrument used for other purposes”.[672]

Funny. I know that here in California Unions definitely contribute to campaign funding.

Even His Holiness recognized the imperfect nature of unions to allow them to go unchecked would be morally wrong.

 

[gamewell45]

Ha… good luck with that.

Once Indiana made public unions an option to join or not… NOBODY joined it. Its dead.
Then once the taxpayers saw the huge improvement in services… BMV that once was an all day nightmare event… to now, after merit pay its 8 minute wait time…the voters overwhelming re elected our Governor.

Wait til Wisconsin sees how much better off they will be with out it.

One can have hope; that combined with prayer and education of the public could have a positive outcome for those members of unions and those who are non-union desiring to unionize.

 

[Scott_Lafrance]

Really? And when you want to learn about biological processes and changes, do you listen to Darwin and other evolutionary scientists?

I am a theistic evolutionist. I listen to faith and reason. However, the Austian School of Economics has its roots in the Catholic Church at the University of Salamanca in Spain by students of St. Thomas Aquinas.

 

[gnjsdad]

I am a theistic evolutionist. I listen to faith and reason. However, the Austian School of Economics has its roots in the Catholic Church at the University of Salamanca in Spain by students of St. Thomas Aquinas.

Ah, the Late Scholastics…I don’t think you’ll find any citations of their work in Papal encyclicals either.

 

[Scott_Lafrance]

Ah, the Late Scholastics…I don’t think you’ll find any citations of their work in Papal encyclicals either.

The Pope’s purview is faith and morals, not economics, science, or sports. I find it laughable that people will simply blow off the economic laws that were discovered by the students of one of the most important Doctors of the Church and embrace the economic theories postulated by an avowed atheist.

 

[gnjsdad]

The Pope’s purview is faith and morals, not economics, science, or sports. I find it laughable that people will simply blow off the economic laws that were discovered by the students of one of the most important Doctors of the Church and embrace the economic theories postulated by an avowed atheist.

I’ll post the following excerpt from an article by Thomas Woods. Then readers can decide whether or not Mr Woods accepts Catholic social teaching…

*By any definition, it lay well beyond the competence of the Magisterium to presume to describe the workings of economic relationships. Catholics who make this point are routinely accused of denying the Church’s right to make moral statements pertaining to economic activity. This criticism is completely baseless, and only serves to distract attention from the substantive issues at stake. … To maintain that private property is just, or that people ought to be upright and honest in their economic activities, requires nothing more than simple reflection on the teaching of Christ, the Fathers, and natural law itself. The same cannot be said for exhortations to employers that they pay a ‘just wage,’ for embedded within such counsel is a set of unproven assumptions about how economic relationships work, and the belief that all that stands between the world today and the great society of tomorrow is wise legislation, rather than the capital investment which is alone capable of increasing the overall stock of wealth. **One hesitates to describe Catholic social teaching as an abuse of papal and ecclesiastical power, but surely the attempt to impose, as moral doctrine binding the entire Catholic world, principles that derive from the popes’ intrinsically fallible reasoning within a secular discipline like economics, seems dubious. *At the very least, it appears to constitute an indefensible extension of the prerogatives of the Church’s legitimate teaching office into areas in which it possesses no inherent competence or divine protection from error.

lewrockwell.com/woods/woods8.html

 

[Scott_Lafrance]

I’ll post the following excerpt from an article by Thomas Woods. Then readers can decide whether or not Mr Woods accepts Catholic social teaching…

*By any definition, it lay well beyond the competence of the Magisterium to presume to describe the workings of economic relationships. Catholics who make this point are routinely accused of denying the Church’s right to make moral statements pertaining to economic activity. This criticism is completely baseless, and only serves to distract attention from the substantive issues at stake. … To maintain that private property is just, or that people ought to be upright and honest in their economic activities, requires nothing more than simple reflection on the teaching of Christ, the Fathers, and natural law itself. The same cannot be said for exhortations to employers that they pay a ‘just wage,’ for embedded within such counsel is a set of unproven assumptions about how economic relationships work, and the belief that all that stands between the world today and the great society of tomorrow is wise legislation, rather than the capital investment which is alone capable of increasing the overall stock of wealth. **One hesitates to describe Catholic social teaching as an abuse of papal and ecclesiastical power, but surely the attempt to impose, as moral doctrine binding the entire Catholic world, principles that derive from the popes’ intrinsically fallible reasoning within a secular discipline like economics, seems dubious. ***At the very least, it appears to constitute an indefensible extension of the prerogatives of the Church’s legitimate teaching office into areas in which it possesses no inherent competence or divine protection from error.
lewrockwell.com/woods/woods8.html

Here, read this and tell me if Tom Woods accepts the authority of the Catholic Church?

tomwoods.com/books/how-the-catholic-church-built-western-civilization/

 

[Borealis]

Evidently, you’re not a teacher and therefore have little idea about how teachers’ unions fight for the benefit of not only teachers, but also students. We as a society would be much poorer, in every sense, without unions fighting for the equal rights of all.

The teachers unions fight for the benefit of students? Why, then, are they unanimously and adamantly opposed to school vouchers, which would allow students and their parents to choose the school they wish to have their child attend, so as to ensure the best possible education?

Teachers unions fight for the benefit of teachers unions, and nothing else.

 

[Borealis]

Probably not, and that’s why parochial school teachers are the lowest paid in the nation. But of course teachers are supposed to be dedicated; they really shouldn’t receive any salary and not worry about inordinate class size (not a problem in most private schools) or other adverse working conditions which affect them and their students. And in private schools there is also the additional worry of being fired at the whim of the headmaster/headmistress without due process, because there is no union. Just as they were hired, not necessarily based on educational credentials and experience.

And as a result, of course, the public schools vastly outperform private schools in educational testing, right?

Oh, wait…

 

[meltzerboy]

The teachers unions fight for the benefit of students? Why, then, are they unanimously and adamantly opposed to school vouchers, which would allow students and their parents to choose the school they wish to have their child attend, so as to ensure the best possible education?

Teachers unions fight for the benefit of teachers unions, and nothing else.

Teachers’ unions fight for students by demanding better working conditions for teachers, which means reductions in class size; increased funding for poor school districts to purchase technology such as computers and videos; more effective teacher development and mentoring programs for new teachers as well as ongoing professional training and workshops for more experienced teachers; equity in hiring practices and salary scales set by administrators, based on academic credentials and experience. All of these measures translate into better instruction and improved performance by students.

 

[meltzerboy]

And as a result, of course, the public schools vastly outperform private schools in educational testing, right?

Oh, wait…

Private schools have the advantage of smaller class size. Any teacher from elementary school to graduate school knows that fewer students means more individual attention and better learning. Also, many private schools have traditionally excluded students with poorer academic performance. The whole history of private school education is based on exclusion, while public school education is based on inclusion. Naturally, with higher selection standards, private schools have a greater opportunity to outperform. Still, there are public schools–and not only the ones which require an entrance exam for admission–that do a great job as well; admittedly, not enough. As the private schools have been lowering their admission standards and increasing their class size, they will most likely find it increasingly more challenging to teach their students as well. And, let us also remember, that private school teachers are not certified and may be hired and fired at the fancy of the headmaster. That is not to say there are no talented teachers in private institutions; but there is no uniform standard for hiring as there is in public schools. It is a little bizarre that the public wants a uniform standard of excellence to measure students’ performance but does not demand such a standard of private school teachers.

If, by educational testing, you’re referring to the standardized tests, this is a big issue for many teachers. The outcry among educators concerning teaching only for the test is not without merit for it diminishes the essence of the learning process. Measuring achievement in learning is not only about testing, let alone standardized tests. Such things as creativity and resourceful problem solving can often not be measured effectively by these methods.

 

[Scott_Lafrance]

Teachers’ unions fight for students by demanding better working conditions for teachers, which means reductions in class size; increased funding for poor school districts to purchase technology such as computers and videos; more effective teacher development and mentoring programs for new teachers as well as ongoing professional training and workshops for more experienced teachers; equity in hiring practices and salary scales set by administrators, based on academic credentials and experience. All of these measures translate into better instruction and improved performance by students.

And of course, all of this has translated into improving academic scores for public schools.

oh wait…