<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Detailed Abstractions &#187; Unions</title>
	<atom:link href="http://detailedabstractions.com/tag/unions/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://detailedabstractions.com</link>
	<description>Pathologically Pro-Freedom</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 04 Aug 2011 23:31:12 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=</generator>
<xhtml:meta xmlns:xhtml="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" name="robots" content="noindex" />
		<item>
		<title>Infinite Monkey Theorems 20100713</title>
		<link>http://detailedabstractions.com/2010/07/13/infinite-monkey-theorems-20100713/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=infinite-monkey-theorems-20100713</link>
		<comments>http://detailedabstractions.com/2010/07/13/infinite-monkey-theorems-20100713/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 13 Jul 2010 16:46:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Michael S. Langston</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Economics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Free Market Principles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judicial System]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Legislation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[People/Blogs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Regulation/Deregulation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SCOTUS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Cato]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Elena Kagan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Freakanomics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Freedom]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nber]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obama Administration]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Robert Reich]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Transparency]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Unions]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://detailedabstractions.com/?p=1117</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Come on&#8230;. we can&#8217;t find any good justices to nominate to SCOTUS?  This is what&#8230; the third (including the previous administration) uninspired justice nominated in just 5 years. For such a prestigious and life long appointment, we should expect much better (via Cato here): Elena Kagan, President Obama&#8217;s nominee for the Supreme Court, seemed to shock many people [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>Come on</strong>&#8230;. we can&#8217;t find any good justices to nominate to SCOTUS?  This is what&#8230; the third (including the previous administration) uninspired justice nominated in just 5 years.</p>
<p>For such a prestigious and life long appointment, we should expect much better (via Cato <a title="Why Should a Supreme Court Justice Care about Natural Rights?" href="http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=11968" target="_blank">here</a>):</p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">Elena Kagan, President Obama&#8217;s nominee for the Supreme Court, seemed to shock many people when she dodged questions about the Declaration of Independence during her testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee&#8230;</p>
<p>DA posts <a title="Infinite Monkey Theorems 20100701" href="http://detailedabstractions.com/2010/07/01/infinite-monkey-theorems-20100701/" target="_blank">here</a> &amp; <a title="Kagan’s Nomination" href="http://detailedabstractions.com/2010/05/12/kagans-nomination/" target="_blank">here</a></p>
<p>Via Freakanomics <a title="When Nurses Go on Strike" href="http://freakonomics.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/07/13/when-nurses-go-on-strike/?utm_source=feedburner&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Feed:+FreakonomicsBlog+(Freakonomics+Blog)" target="_blank">here</a>, which will hopefully put to rest the idea that nurses go on strike to &#8220;help&#8221; patients, from the NBER paper:</p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">&#8230;Controlling for hospital-specific heterogeneity, patient demographics and disease severity, the results show that nurses’ strikes increase in-hospital mortality by 19.4% and 30-day readmission by 6.5% for patients admitted during a strike, with little change in patient demographics, disease severity or treatment intensity&#8230;.</p>
<p><strong>Robert Reich </strong>via Salon.com <a title="The root of economic fragility and political anger" href="http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2010/07/13/reich_economic_anger/index.html" target="_blank">here</a> demonstrates once again how much politics effects his economic analysis.  According to him, this whole economic mess, including a potential backslide can be blamed solely on deregulation:</p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">&#8230;starting in the late 1970s, and with increasing fervor over the next three decades, government did just the opposite. It deregulated and privatized. It increased the cost of public higher education and cut public transportation. It shredded safety nets&#8230;</p>
<p>Which he believes is causing greater wage disparities:</p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">&#8230;We’re back to the same ominous trend as before the Great Recession: a larger and larger share of total income going to the very top while the vast middle class continues to lose ground&#8230;.</p>
<p>Because with deregulation, of course, companies can become EVIL:</p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">&#8230;Companies were allowed to slash jobs and wages, cut benefits and shift risks to employees (from you-can-count-on-it pensions to do-it-yourself 401(k)s, from good health coverage to soaring premiums and deductibles)&#8230;.</p>
<p>I submit what Mr. Reich fears is freedom &#8211; freedom of business owners to hire and fire as they wish, freedom of employees to change jobs easily (401K allows this, pension does not), just freedom.</p>
<p>Secondarily, you can see in his writing that the only thing the government has ever done wrong, is by not getting involved enough.  He doesn&#8217;t mention government meddling, deficit spending, enormous new health care expenses, entirely new federal agencies which more money will be needed, idiotic regulations like a moratorium on all oil drilling due to one company&#8217;s failure&#8230;.</p>
<p>Nope, for Mr. Reich, it&#8217;s all because the government hasn&#8217;t taken enough control over the little people.</p>
<p>Via Cato <a title="The (Still) Missing Social Security Annual Report" href="http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=11974&amp;utm_source=feedburner&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Feed:+CatoRecentOpeds+(Cato+Recent+Op-eds)&amp;utm_content=Google+Reader" target="_blank">here</a>, more news on the Obama Administration&#8217;s <em>transparency:</em></p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">The Social Security&#8217;s trustees&#8217; annual report is, by law, supposed to be published by April 1. This year, however, the trustees have postponed its release indefinitely. The program&#8217;s financial condition continues to remain hidden from public view — and by many accounts will continue to be so until the end of the fiscal year&#8230;.</p>
<p>Wonder if Reich views this as an issue?</p>
     ]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://detailedabstractions.com/2010/07/13/infinite-monkey-theorems-20100713/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Infinite Monkey Theorems 20100427</title>
		<link>http://detailedabstractions.com/2010/04/27/infinite-monkey-theorems-20100427/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=infinite-monkey-theorems-20100427</link>
		<comments>http://detailedabstractions.com/2010/04/27/infinite-monkey-theorems-20100427/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Apr 2010 19:26:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Michael S. Langston</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Business]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Economics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judicial System]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[People/Blogs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Random Links]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SCOTUS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[9th Circuit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Auto Industry Bailout]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[e!Science News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Infinite Monkey Theorems]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Justice System]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[LA Times]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Reason.com]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Unions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[WSJ]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://detailedabstractions.com/?p=943</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The 9th Circuit strikes again&#8230;. via LA Times (here): SAN FRANCISCO — A sharply divided federal appeals court in California on Monday exposed Wal-Mart Stores Inc. to billions of dollars in legal damages when it ruled a massive class action lawsuit alleging gender discrimination over pay for female workers can go to trial&#8230;. Now I [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong><a href="http://detailedabstractions.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/lady-justice.jpg"><img class="size-medium wp-image-945 alignright" style="margin-left: 3px;" title="lady justice" src="http://detailedabstractions.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/lady-justice-190x300.jpg" alt="" width="130" height="210" /></a>The 9th </strong>Circuit strikes again&#8230;. via LA Times (<a title="Court: Wal-Mart to face massive class action suit" href="http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-walmart-20100427,0,3396163.story" target="_blank" class="broken_link">here</a>):</p>
<p style="padding-left: 60px;">SAN FRANCISCO — A sharply divided federal appeals court in California on  Monday exposed Wal-Mart Stores Inc. to billions of dollars in legal  damages when it ruled a massive class action lawsuit alleging gender  discrimination over pay for female workers can go to trial&#8230;.</p>
<p>Now I don&#8217;t claim to be a lawyer and haven&#8217;t even played one on tv, but part of the dissent seems obvious to me:</p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">&#8230;Judge Sandra Ikuta wrote a blistering dissent, joined by four of her  colleagues.</p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">&#8220;No court has ever certified a class like this one, until now. And with  good reason,&#8221; Ikuta wrote. &#8220;In this case, six women who have worked in  thirteen of Wal-Mart&#8217;s 3,400 stores seek to represent every woman who  has worked in those stores over the course of the last decade — a class  estimated in 2001 to include more than 1.5 million women.&#8221;&#8230;</p>
<p>Maybe they like being overturned (<a title="Disorder in the court" href="http://articles.latimes.com/2007/jul/11/opinion/oe-fitzpatrick11" target="_blank">here</a> from 2007)?</p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">&#8230;The 9th Circuit also has a long-running streak as the most overturned,  which went unbroken this year. The Supreme Court reviewed 22 cases from  the 9th Circuit last term, and it reversed or vacated 19 times&#8230;.</p>
<p><strong>Via</strong> WSJ, <a title="The Big Brown Union Bailout " href="http://online.wsj.com/article_email/SB10001424052748704133804575198232906957778-lMyQjAxMTAwMDIwNzEyNDcyWj.html" target="_blank"><em>The Big Brown Union Bailout</em></a></p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">If you can&#8217;t beat &#8216;em, have Congress hobble &#8216;em. That&#8217;s the motto of some in corporate America, and Exhibit A might be United Parcel Service&#8217;s campaign to get Washington to impose its labor woes on rival Federal Express. This would be one more union bailout at the expense of business competition and economic efficiency&#8230;.</p>
<p>This is a continuation of this administration&#8217;s policies to pay off unions at the expense of others (DA posts <a href="http://detailedabstractions.com/?s=unions&amp;x=0&amp;y=0">here</a>).</p>
<p><strong>Via </strong>Reason.com, <a title="GM's Phony Bailout Payback" href="http://reason.com/archives/2010/04/27/gms-phony-bailout-payback?utm_source=feedburner&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Feed%3A+reason%2FArticles+%28Reason+Online+-+All+Articles+%28except+Hit+%26+Run+blog%29%29" target="_blank"><em>GM&#8217;s Phony Bailout Payback</em></a></p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">Uncle Sam gave GM <a href="http://www.carlist.com/blog/?p=1374" class="broken_link">$49.5  billion</a> last summer in aid to finance its bankruptcy&#8230;.  So when Whitacre publishes a column with the headline, &#8220;The GM Bailout: Paid Back in Full,&#8221; most ordinary mortals unfamiliar with bailout minutia would assume that he is alluding to the entire $49.5 billion. That, however, is far from the case&#8230;.</p>
<p>I say if you want to buy American, buy Ford &#8211; no bailout money and still going strong.</p>
<p><strong>&amp; cool science </strong>news via e!Science (<a title="Physicists capture first images of atomic spin" href="http://esciencenews.com/articles/2010/04/26/physicists.capture.first.images.atomic.spin?utm_source=feedburner&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Feed%3A+eScienceNews%2Fpopular+%28e!+Science+News+-+Popular%29" target="_blank">here</a>):</p>
<p>&#8230;<a href="http://esciencenews.com/articles/2010/04/26/physicists.capture.first.images.atomic.spin?utm_source=feedburner&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Feed%3A+eScienceNews%2Fpopular+%28e!+Science+News+-+Popular%29"><img class="alignleft" style="margin-left: 4px; margin-right: 4px;" src="http://esciencenews.com/files/images/201004262985990.jpg" alt="" width="160" height="80" /></a>In a study published as an Advance Online Publication in the journal <em>Nature  Nanotechnology</em> on Sunday, physicists at Ohio University and the  University of Hamburg in Germany present the first images of spin in  action&#8230;.</p>
     ]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://detailedabstractions.com/2010/04/27/infinite-monkey-theorems-20100427/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Unions &#8211; Unionized Against Freedom</title>
		<link>http://detailedabstractions.com/2009/12/29/unions-unionized-against-freedom/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=unions-unionized-against-freedom</link>
		<comments>http://detailedabstractions.com/2009/12/29/unions-unionized-against-freedom/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Dec 2009 21:25:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Michael S. Langston</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Economics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Free Market Principles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Critical Thinking]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Freedom]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Incentives]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Legislation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Unions]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://detailedabstractions.com/?p=637</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This year is really a banner year for the unions.  Recently, they begin early pushing the Obama administration to pass the double-speak entitled bill, the Employee Free Choice Act (which actually removes individual free choice - here @DA).

Not content with simply removing your right to vote anonymously and thereby reduce your freedom of association, they went to the state level.  There they decided that individual business owners can now be forced by law into the union (here @ WSJ):]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This year is really a banner year for the unions.  Recently, they begin early pushing the Obama administration to pass the double-speak entitled bill, the <em>Employee Free Choice Act (</em>which actually removes individual free choice - <a title="So Free Choice Means Lack of Choice?" href="http://detailedabstractions.com/2009/03/27/so-free-choice-means-lack-of-choice/" target="_blank">here</a> @DA).</p>
<p>Not content with simply removing your right to vote anonymously and thereby reduce your freedom of association, they went to the state level.  There they decided that individual business owners can now be forced by law into the union (<a title="Michigan Forces Business Owners Into Public Sector Unions" href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703478704574612341241120838.html" target="_blank">here</a> @ WSJ):</p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px; ">&#8230;A year ago in December, Ms. Berry and more than 40,000 other home-based day care providers statewide were suddenly informed they were members of Child Care Providers Together Michigan—a union created in 2006 by the United Auto Workers and the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees&#8230;.</p>
<p>&amp; obviously they are doing this for a reason:</p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px; ">&#8230;Today the Department of Human Services siphons about $3.7 million in annual dues to the union—from the child-care subsidies&#8230;.</p>
<p>But not to worry, the union is doing something with all that money.  More lobbying:</p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">&#8230;Ms. Berry now sees money once paid to her go to a union that does little for her. She says she is &#8220;self employed and wants nothing to do with the union.&#8221;</p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">The union claims it is working for Ms. Berry and others like her by pressing the legislature to increase child-care payments&#8230;.</p>
<p>For the score keepers at home &#8211; the government through union lobbying has forced (by law) private citizens running their own commercial enterprise to pay dues, which they graciously will remove from their state reimbursed child-care subsidy checks&#8230;. all in order to lobby the government to raise the child-care subsidy.</p>
<p>For the union organization itself though &#8211; lobbying dollars spent pays off.  Also from earlier this year, during bankruptcy of large companies involving unions, they got paid first (<a title="Bankruptcy, Obama, &amp; the Rule of Law" href="http://detailedabstractions.com/2009/05/15/bankruptcy-obama-the-rule-of-law/" target="_blank">here</a> @ DA):</p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">&#8230;Now we have POTUS playing politics with the rule of law.  Ensuring money goes to unions before secured creditors, the same unions who are using that money to buy up assets of the companies they helped to bankrupt&#8230;.</p>
<p>The unions and their elected representatives of course are playing the game as designed and currently played by the voters.   The unions know based upon their membership and war chest they can affect the outcome of an election.  The leaders they help get elected know this and therefore craft union friendly legislation.</p>
<p>Effectively the unions moved away from an organization championing workers&#8217; rights, into another corporation using the government to ensure their continued existence.  &amp; by doing so, they will ultimately raise the cost of doing business for everyone, including the working families they claim to support.</p>
<p>As always in a representative government, the voters are ultimately to blame.  Whether their failure is due to an inability to care, critically think, understand basic economic incentives, or lack of equilibrium between the moons of Venus &amp; Neptune&#8230;</p>
<p>Irregardless of why, given the current state of incentives and voters unwillingness to punish their legislators, unions will continue to rent-seek at the expense of the average  citizen.</p>
     ]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://detailedabstractions.com/2009/12/29/unions-unionized-against-freedom/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Juan Williams comes to Rush Limbaugh&#8217;s Defense</title>
		<link>http://detailedabstractions.com/2009/10/16/juan-williams-comes-to-rush-limbaughs-defense/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=juan-williams-comes-to-rush-limbaughs-defense</link>
		<comments>http://detailedabstractions.com/2009/10/16/juan-williams-comes-to-rush-limbaughs-defense/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 16 Oct 2009 06:33:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Michael S. Langston</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Celebrities/Celebrity Culture]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Critical Thinking]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NGOs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[People/Blogs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Political Philosophy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bill O'Reilly]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Culture]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Domestic Violence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FOX News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hypocrisy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Juan Williams]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Leonard Little]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Logic]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Logical Inconsistency]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Michael Vick]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NFL]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics of the Self-Righteous]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rush Limbaugh]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[St. Louis Rams]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The O'Reilly Factor]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Unions]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://detailedabstractions.com/?p=248</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In what has to be a of the sign of the coming apocalypse, Juan Williams is now defending Rush Limbaugh (video).

While debating Warren Ballentine on the O'Reilly Factor, Juan Williams defended Rush Limbaugh against the constant attacks since the public caught wind of his potential investment in the St. Louis Rams.

Apparently a combination of the celebrity culture that is today's professional sports and the proclaimed self-righteousness of the NFL, their players' union and professional race "leaders" can actually lead to a temporary peace deal between  Rush &#038; Juan.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In what has to be a of the sign of the coming apocalypse, Juan Williams is now defending Rush Limbaugh <a href="http://video.aol.co.uk/video-detail/bill-oreilly-juan-williams-and-warren-ballentine-debate-rush-limbaughs-nfl-bid/3002258510" target="_blank">(video</a>).</p>
<p>While debating Warren Ballentine on the <em>O&#8217;Reilly Factor, </em>Juan Williams defended Rush Limbaugh against the constant attacks since the public caught wind of his potential investment in the <a title="Rush Limbaugh might purchase NFL's Rams" href="http://www.argusleader.com/article/20091006/UPDATES/91006072/-1/updates" target="_blank">St. Louis Rams</a>.</p>
<p>Apparently a combination of the celebrity culture that is today&#8217;s professional sports and the proclaimed self-righteousness of the NFL, their players&#8217; union and professional race &#8220;leaders&#8221; can actually lead to a temporary peace deal between  Rush &amp; Juan.</p>
<p>That&#8217;s only part of the story &#8211; the rest of the story should be the blatant hypocrisy of an organization which demonstrates regularly that it could care less about real criminal acts, much less controversial statements from within their ranks.</p>
<p>The easiest example for analyzing the league&#8217;s value system based upon their actions is <a title="Michael Vick Signs with the Eagles" href="http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/unleashed/2009/08/animal-advocates-react-to-the-philadelphia-eagles-signing-of-michael-vick.html" target="_blank">Michael Vick</a>.  Giving this guy a job after he was convicted of torturing animals to death for their unwillingness or inability to fight very well was a calculated decision about money.  But that&#8217;s really just the start of the NFL&#8217;s long tradition of tolerating and enabling criminals.</p>
<p>It seems we can&#8217;t go more than a couple weeks without a players getting arrested for drinking and driving.  For example, the St. Louis Rams are still allowing Leonard Little to play football, even after killing someone in a drunk driving incident which he followed up with <strong><em>another </em></strong>DWI (<a title="Little in deep trouble after another arrest for DWI" href="http://www.usatoday.com/sports/football/nfl/rams/2004-04-26-little-charged_x.htm" target="_blank">here</a>) arrest.</p>
<p>Even more recently the Rams have shown a complete disregard for the community by their willingness to take a firm stand on behalf of players killing innocent citizens.  Ignoring their past problems, they thought it might be a good idea to bring on a new player with prior <a title="Fletcher passed Rams' character test" href="http://espn.go.com/blog/nfcwest/post/_/id/2883/fletcher-passed-rams-character-test" target="_blank">DUIs</a>.</p>
<p>No worries to the citizens of St. Louis though, according to the Ram&#8217;s GM, he passed the &#8220;character&#8221; test during background investigations.   I&#8217;m sure the friends and family of the deceased are glad to know this player received the all important, &#8220;I looked into his eye and saw his character&#8221; test.</p>
<p>Of course it&#8217;s not just the Rams.  Let&#8217;s not forget <a href="http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=09000d5d811dbe22&amp;template=without-video-with-comments&amp;confirm=true" target="_blank">Dante Stallworth</a> recently entered into the &#8220;NFL players who  killed innocent people&#8221; club as well.</p>
<p>&amp; as NFL traditions go, drinking and driving is just one of the time honored ones.  Another tradition  is using their strength to assault others.   Domestic violence seems to be the most popular  form of this tradition (<a title="Quinn arrested after confrontation" href="http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=4453508" target="_blank">here</a>, <a title="Merriman arrested after Tequila's call" href="http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=4450962" target="_blank">here</a>, &amp; <a title="Marshall's trial moved back" href="http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=4238587" target="_blank">here</a>), including the amazing amount of courage it takes to beat your babys&#8217; momma with an aluminum mop handle while the kids watch (<a title="REPORT: RAIDERS' CORNELL GREEN BEAT WOMAN WITH MOP HANDLE" href="http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2009/03/22/report-raiders-cornell-green-beat-woman-with-mop-handle/" target="_blank">here</a>).</p>
<p>As bad as all that is by itself, this information truly is a very small percentage of the NFL&#8217;s actions as it relates to criminal behavior within their ranks.   The endless stream of examples includes all types of crime including <a title="Rookie charged with assaulting officer" href="http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=4418304" target="_blank">assaulting cops</a>, <a title="Linebacker Phillips cited for battery" href="http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=4106002" target="_blank">assaulting security guards</a>, <a title="Philly man in critical condition" href="http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=4348077" target="_blank">shootings</a>, <a title="Henry gets 3 years in federal prison" href="http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=4330252" target="_blank">drug rings</a>, <a title="Goodell meets with Bills RB Lynch over gun charge" href="http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/wire?section=nfl&amp;id=3990418" target="_blank">weapon&#8217;s charges</a>, <a title="Henry gets 3 years in federal prison" href="http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=4330252" target="_blank"> </a><a title="Rogers jailed, eyes comeback" href="http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=4014514" target="_blank">probation violations</a>, <a title="Source: Cable’s potential legal issues a concern" href="Source: Cable’s potential legal issues a concern" target="_blank">coaches assaulting other coaches</a>, and even just plain ole indecent <a title="Two Saints charged with lewd conduct" href="http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=4131618" target="_blank">exposure</a> &#8211; which in some cases can result in a being forced to register as  sex offender.  There are literally so many available examples of NFL players&#8217; crimes, it&#8217;s challenging to pick and choose enough examples to be convincing, while ensuring this post doesn&#8217;t end up longer than the health care bill.</p>
<p>Indeed, so much information exists that at least one website is dedicated to tracking it (<a href="http://nflcrimes.blogspot.com/" target="_blank">NFL Crimes News Blog</a>).   A while back they even promised to take down their entire site if they could go 60 days without seeing an arrest posted on ProFootballTalk police <a href="http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/turd-watch/police-blotter/" target="_blank" class="broken_link">blotter</a>.  The closest they&#8217;ve gotten is 29 days.</p>
<p>The basic point?  For an organization with such a demonstrable history of ignoring and enabling real crime, their attempt to come off as self-righteous based on someone&#8217;s past comments is another perfect example of style over substance.  It would almost be amusing if it didn&#8217;t show how shallow our celebrity obsessed culture can be.</p>
<p>Standard Libertarian Disclaimer:  As a private business the NFL can pick and chose its investors at will.  I really don&#8217;t care all that much that the NFL pulled Rush&#8217;s <a href="http://www.theweek.com/article/index/101591/Rush_Limbaugh_Cut_out_of_the_NFL" target="_blank">bid</a> nor would I ever want to take away their rights to do so.</p>
<p>Of course as a corollary to their freedom to chose their investors, we all have the freedom to point out the hypocrisy of such a decision.  When the NFL, the players, and the players&#8217; union collectively run around throwing matches at people while they know full well they are standing in a house full of gun powder &amp; explosives, they deserve nothing more than ridicule.</p>
     ]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://detailedabstractions.com/2009/10/16/juan-williams-comes-to-rush-limbaughs-defense/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Apparently beggars can be choosers&#8230;</title>
		<link>http://detailedabstractions.com/2009/09/23/apparently-beggars-can-be-choosers/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=apparently-beggars-can-be-choosers</link>
		<comments>http://detailedabstractions.com/2009/09/23/apparently-beggars-can-be-choosers/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Sep 2009 13:10:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Michael S. Langston</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Business]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Critical Thinking]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Economics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Political Philosophy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Arrogance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Corruption]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Doublespeak]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Government Services]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[idiocy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Logical Inconsistency]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[raises]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[state workers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Statism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[taxpayers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Unemployment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Unions]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://detailedabstractions.com/?p=94</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[With the state of Missouri's recent fiscal problems and a 9.4% unemployment rate, the state worker's union has decided now is the time to act.

Questions for the unions:  Is it time to cut back?  Become more lean?  Follow the rest of private industry and cut back as revenue growth loses momentum?

Union's answer:  Surely ye jest!  We're the union &#038; the time is ripe for a pay raise!]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>With the state of Missouri&#8217;s <a title="Missouri budget shortfall could lead to bumpy road" href="http://stlouis.bizjournals.com/stlouis/stories/2008/03/03/editorial5.html" target="_blank">recent fiscal problems</a> and a <a title="Unemployment rate" href="http://www.google.com/publicdata?ds=usunemployment&amp;met=unemployment_rate&amp;idim=state:ST290000&amp;q=missouri+unemployment+rate" target="_blank">9.4% unemployment rate</a>, the state worker&#8217;s union has decided now is the time to act.</p>
<p>Questions for the unions:  Is it time to cut back?  Become more lean?  Follow the rest of private industry and cut back as revenue growth loses momentum?</p>
<p>Union&#8217;s answer:  Surely ye jest!  We&#8217;re the union &amp; the time is ripe for a pay raise!</p>
<p>That&#8217;s correct.  As the entire state population spends less money to try to tread water in these tight times, the unions apparently believe they are in prime position to <a title="Mo. state workers union proposes 6 percent raise as contract negotiations begin" href="http://www.fox4kc.com/news/sns-ap-mo--unionbargaining,0,953319.story" target="_blank" class="broken_link">negotiate</a>:</p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">&#8230;The union has proposed a 6 percent annual pay raise for the next three years and a &#8220;fair share&#8221; fee for nonunion members who are covered by union-negotiated contracts. The negations are over a contract for patient care support workers that expired in June and one for craft and maintenance employees that expired in December.</p>
<p>But wait!  Ask them nicely and they&#8217;ll tell you that they only have the best of intentions:</p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">Curt Ostrander, the union&#8217;s chief negotiator, told The Associated Press that the union&#8217;s priority is protect state workers, address staff shortages and help people do their jobs better. He described discussions with the state thus far as &#8220;cooperative,&#8221; and said the two sides are trying to find ways to be more efficient to save money and solve problems.</p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">&#8220;Our top priorities are to provide a contract that gives workers the necessary protection in order for them to perform their jobs in a safe, effective manner and to provide state services,&#8221; Ostrander said&#8230;.</p>
<p>For those MBA&#8217;s out there &#8211; please note the very sound logic incorporated in &#8220;address staff shortages and become more efficient to save money&#8221; while simultaneously asking for a 6% raise for the next 3 years during a recession.</p>
<p>The audacity it takes to ask the tax payers of this state to pony up 6% annual raises, while many in the state can&#8217;t or won&#8217;t get a raise at all this year, is pompous and arrogant.</p>
<p>This combined with them selling the money grab as something that will reduce costs, while increasing staff, is completely disingenuous.</p>
<p>To be fair, this is an opening gambit and it&#8217;s not likely they&#8217;ll get everything (though the governor is pro-union), but if we continue to allow our elected leaders and unelected leaders (read: special interests) to operate within side the quiet world of doublespeak without so much as a whimper of an objection, then we surely are going to get exactly what we deserve.</p>
<p>Read all about government wages versus free market wages in The Great Recession <a title="Government – The Only Recession Proof Business" href="http://detailedabstractions.com/2009/08/25/government-the-only-recession-proof-business/" target="_blank">here</a></p>
     ]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://detailedabstractions.com/2009/09/23/apparently-beggars-can-be-choosers/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Minified using disk: basic (User agent is rejected)
Page Caching using disk: enhanced (User agent is rejected)
Object Caching 6614/6614 objects using disk: basic

Served from: detailedabstractions.com @ 2012-05-23 17:17:02 -->
