When Unions go to far.

Wisconsin is just one example of a government that has no choice but to eliminate the union and start over with new public employees. Union free, with marginal negotiated benefits at cheaper rates, and with cheaper medical insurance for all new employees.   Result will be more money in the hands of the employees because there are no union fees being taken out, and no union telling an employer that they can not make changes to insurance companies to take advantage of competitive prices. 

When unions step in as they have in Wisconsin and say no to reforms, they cut every members throat.  Now when faced with the destruction of the union in the state, they are willing to talk, but its far too late.  Elimination of the union in the state is the only way to move forward with a balanced budget and a plan for the economic well being of the future.   When a union does this kind of thing to a business, they close up shop and move on.  Resulting in unemployment of thousands, in some cases killing a city.  Who is to blame?  The company that could not staff their business and was forced to leave?  Or the union that would not allow their members to report to work or face ejection from the union.  The honest answer is the union.  The business may have negotiated for a time and been able to do something but the end result would have been more net losses over time because the union would always use such a tactic over their heads.  When that fails they turn violent.  Businesses leave.  Union members left out in the cold, or in some rare cases relocated across the country to a different job. 

When it comes to states and federal governments, UNIONS are quite simply communist.  For a State can not go out of business, but they MUST have a balanced budget, and must maintain order and ability to prosper for ALL citizens. Unions prevent this possibility.  Because the goal of a union is not the prosperity of its members, but the prosperity of union power.   Layoffs are acceptable to a union if it means retaining its power over their majority of its members.   All they do is increase dues to maintain their budget.  A tactic the employer or the government is not allowed to do.  So left with the choice of massive layoffs or removal of the union the sate is making the correct choice.  Removal of the union.  If the workers want to work their jobs are there.  If they do not they need to employ union free labor to fill those positions.  Only then can a government begin to trim their outrageous expenses and balance a budget to allow for American prosperity once again.  Only then can we as a nation start to pull ourselves out of the ever growing debt of ours, and only then can true competition in medical insurance be allowed to prosper and grow opportunities for every American to have healthcare on their own terms and by their own choices for the betterment of their families, and their pursuit of happiness.  Unions have their place.  But in public services and government positions unions just do not belong.  It is the single biggest error in leadership in the past 70 years that such a state was allowed to happen at all.  

This case will be repeated all over the nation state to state over and over through the next decade.  It will not go away.  Only those that stand their ground and only hire union free labor will stand a chance at prosperity solutions.  Otherwise we might as well wipe our hands with the Constitution and form a new union under a communist China flag.  One nation, under debt, with entitlement, and servitude for all.  God save us that fate.  May judgment day come first.

Choice, or forced servatude to existance?

What is suicide?  An end of life? A preventable mistake made by the deranged? Or simply ones taking of ones own fate in their own hands?  For some this question weighs heavy on their existence on this world.  Why do we have to stay in a life that does not want them in it and has no use for them?   I am such a man.  I have never had trusted friends, I have never really had a career, nor a girlfriend, let alone wife and children.  My father is dead, my family is dead, I am alone.  I exist, and every morning I regret that God has left me in this filth of life to awaken yet again.  Yet I have not the right to ask for the assistance to end my life on my terms.  Why?  Is it illegal to end the government of their life of taxes they could potentially gain from me?  Would that not be preferable then being a social burden on society?  Why would I want to be treated to continue to exist?  There is nothing in life for me other then loneliness and servitude to expensive medications that dull down life to numbness. Is that any better then the freedom of the choice of suicide on my own terms?  We as a race overpopulate our world as it is, why not allow the choice given to all other living things.  When its their time most animals make their final trek into the wild and allow themselves to be consumed.  It’s nature to know when your time is over and allow that inner peace.  But in human society this is taboo.
Not long ago, the right to suicide and the right to assisted suicide seemed a single issue. Do individuals’ lives belong to society, or themselves? For most humanists the answer was obvious. People own their lives; self-determination is a primary value. Therefore, society should get out of the way of rational suicides, letting them pursue their urgently held desires even unto death. We might not approve of their reasons, but what of it? It is they, not we, who choose to expend their highest asset. This reflects a centuries-old emancipatory current in Western thought, roughly coeval with Renaissance humanism, which freed individuals from various social and ecclesiastical controls.

Generations ago, your parents told you how you’d earn your living and whom you’d marry. Priests told you what to worship. Kings told you what to think. Your life belonged to God or the state; woe to any who dared resolve that they had lived enough. Suicide was a crime akin to poaching. There being no way to punish successful perpetrators, society could only lard on opprobrium, heightening the prospective cost to a suicide’s survivors.

Today people choose their careers, their orientation (sexual or social), their mates, change their religious views and their politics, and can think for themselves. One archaic yoke remains: the conviction that whoever owns your life, it’s not you. Hence suicide remains under that umbra of social denunciation from which divorce—or, say, marrying outside your social class—has but recently emerged. The prohibition of suicide may be the last of the ancient régime’s curbs on self-determination.  If your life is yours, then it is no one else’s business if you choose to discontinue having experiences. If others yearn to offer relief to sufferers unable to end their own lives, there’s no moral reason why they shouldn’t. Yet those forces in play to force existence over ones free choice to end that existance cloak themselves in science, arguing that all suicides result from potentially preventable chemical imbalances in the brain. In other words, the suicidal deserve no rights because they’re insane by definition. When science runs out, critics focus on the agony of those the suicide leaves behind.

I put to you when there is no one to leave behind ones life is already over, why continue existence beyond ones time?  Is one petty and sad life truly REQUIRED to be lived?  Why?  So others can feel better about themselves for forcing them to? So that others my force their will and subjection on people that just want to find the peace of nonexistence?   You walk around blind to the torture of others around you.  Dumb founded that they can not be as happy as you.  Blissful in your drudgery of endless work, debt, argument, and struggle just to continue to exist.  All the while humans the parasitical race that they are, destroy everything they touch, consume more then they produce, and over breed until food supplies run out.  My real question to you is why not let we few that have the desire to be let out of this life alone to their freedom?  You have the freedom to pursue happiness in any way you choose, afford we few the same courtesy to find or happy end.