Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Hortensis

(58,785 posts)
81. I really like coops as yet another answer, not the only one.
Sun Jun 12, 2016, 04:10 PM
Jun 2016

Since they are worker owned, of course, not everyone could just go get a job in one, or want to commit to buying in. They need other opportunities.

First task is restoring the government regulations destroyed by conservatives, creating new ones, and repealing predatory laws. Encourage a new union movement when and where people are interested enough to want it. Eventual government ownership and/or control of some services, similar to the USPS.

Reminds me that right now some states have been passing laws making it illegal for communities to provide high-speed internet to their residents. At the urging of internet profiteers, of course, a corrupt misuse of government which makes them fair game for takeover as a basic utility as far as I'm concerned. This is only one part of a very large iceberg, of course, that has nothing to do with labor. So much to do! Obama's merely started.

because the DNC is corporate owned and does not want to hear the peoples voice swhisper1 Jun 2016 #1
Question: How much UNION representation is needed? Hortensis Jun 2016 #44
Labor and workers rights have been systematically destroyed (and teachers) swhisper1 Jun 2016 #57
Yes, but that doesn't answer the question of Hortensis Jun 2016 #66
I agree, I do not know what is appropriate. I know what is not appropriate swhisper1 Jun 2016 #69
Oh, I can. Remember, it was the American PEOPLE Hortensis Jun 2016 #70
I think the happy medium may be co-ops, which are internal unions swhisper1 Jun 2016 #78
This place begins to sound more and more like Fox News...so now we are against Unions? insta8er Jun 2016 #79
no, I didnt say that. I want to save them. Corruption does exist in any large body swhisper1 Jun 2016 #80
I really like coops as yet another answer, not the only one. Hortensis Jun 2016 #81
Too many union people will make the lobbyists uncomfortable! n/t QC Jun 2016 #2
Because they stopped reliably voting for us in the 1980s Recursion Jun 2016 #3
this is true Florencenj2point0 Jun 2016 #5
so you're admitting that the much ballyhoo'd union endorsements Hillary received were only azurnoir Jun 2016 #8
I never claimed otherwise (you may be mistaking me for a Clinton supporter?) Recursion Jun 2016 #10
as to the Teamsters and Reagan if memory serves they cut a deal with him wherein he deregulated the azurnoir Jun 2016 #14
The strike was the reason I mentioned PATCO Recursion Jun 2016 #27
I do not think the Teamsters would undercut themselves by doing that wallyworld2 Jun 2016 #48
So...they have to start voting Democratic again without getting a say... Ken Burch Jun 2016 #11
I'm not sure there are enough union voters left for it to matter Recursion Jun 2016 #13
Then we need to make it clear we support the GROWTH of the labor movement. Ken Burch Jun 2016 #20
I care about workers; unions are a tool for improving their conditions Recursion Jun 2016 #29
Those two-tier contracts are the product of the weakening of unions. Ken Burch Jun 2016 #30
because Hillary's people Florencenj2point0 Jun 2016 #4
so Dana Vickers Shelley was lying when she said only one labor group allowed? ? azurnoir Jun 2016 #9
As was discussed a couple weeks ago, when this was posted numerous times, both Sanders and Clinton SFnomad Jun 2016 #6
Why should there only be ONE "labor union rep" on the full committee. Ken Burch Jun 2016 #21
Organized labor is less than 10% of the population Recursion Jun 2016 #36
But isn't that a self-creating problem? Scootaloo Jun 2016 #77
Aren't most GE's won by less than 10%? EndElectoral Jun 2016 #89
no, that is not what I said Florencenj2point0 Jun 2016 #47
That's not what happened SFnomad Jun 2016 #62
It is not like Labor has somewhere else to go. Downwinder Jun 2016 #7
Keep saying that... Ken Burch Jun 2016 #12
Hope so. I go with them. Downwinder Jun 2016 #23
The Democratic Party is not a labor party tralala Jun 2016 #15
well in my state the Democratic party is the DFL Democratic Farmer Labor azurnoir Jun 2016 #18
Totally agree. jwirr Jun 2016 #73
Because the democratic party doesn't care about labor. Labor gets in the way of the lobbyists. jillan Jun 2016 #16
They excluded Rose Ann DeMoro, the President of the Nurses Union and his super-PAC Starry Messenger Jun 2016 #17
they said only 1 labor group, moreover it seems rather vindictive of the DNC to go back 16 years azurnoir Jun 2016 #19
So, if you supported Nader, you can expect to be blacklisted unto your tenth generation? Ken Burch Jun 2016 #22
This message was self-deleted by its author tralala Jun 2016 #24
I think former Nader voters switch long ago Nader hasn't run in 16 years azurnoir Jun 2016 #25
If you supported Nader, you really should not be drafting anything for Democrats. Nt msanthrope Jun 2016 #31
Even though that was sixteen years ago and this person has been back in the party for ages? Ken Burch Jun 2016 #32
No one caused Nader's run but his egotism. That you do not see the sheer opportunism msanthrope Jun 2016 #51
It serves no purpose to pretend it was that simple. Ken Burch Jun 2016 #82
That's ridiculous. Nader's positions are in line with the roots of the Democratic Party. cui bono Jun 2016 #34
His union busting activities are not in line with us. Nt msanthrope Jun 2016 #49
No, that would not be. Neither are the Clinton's. cui bono Jun 2016 #75
To reach back 16 years seems a bit vindictive IMO azurnoir Jun 2016 #35
It's smart. People who fell for Nader have no business leading Democrats. nt msanthrope Jun 2016 #50
Nor do people who support the TPP, private prisons, compromising a woman's right cui bono Jun 2016 #76
The NNU are good people. Ash_F Jun 2016 #41
No....they aren't. The Green/Republican alliance in PA proved that. nt msanthrope Jun 2016 #52
... Ash_F Jun 2016 #72
Welcome to DU Fumesucker Jun 2016 #39
This message was self-deleted by its author tralala Jun 2016 #28
Because labor represents workers and the DNC represents management. senz Jun 2016 #26
Bingo! Juicy_Bellows Jun 2016 #37
Because Bill Clinton sold labor out when he embraced the DLC and corporate money. cui bono Jun 2016 #33
+ a gazillion. nt Live and Learn Jun 2016 #64
Truer words were never spoken. Thank you. Just think about jwirr Jun 2016 #74
The political party that labor built is no longer representing labor. My dad is rolling over B Calm Jun 2016 #38
I second that as a life member of CWA! dmosh42 Jun 2016 #54
In retrospect the eventual course of labor in America was set by the Hardhat Riot Fumesucker Jun 2016 #40
We're not about working people anymore. Now it telecomm, insurance and payday loan corporations. Scuba Jun 2016 #42
if we ever address infrastructure, labor will experiencing a boom swhisper1 Jun 2016 #59
If giving monopolies to telecomms is "addressing infrastructure" we're doing a great job! Scuba Jun 2016 #63
I'm completely against monopolys- another flaw in Clintons administration swhisper1 Jun 2016 #65
Sorry, my cynicism meter has been redlined for a couple weeks now. Scuba Jun 2016 #67
I'm afraid you are not alone swhisper1 Jun 2016 #68
Bernie got four terrible picks that could have gone to labor. Demsrule86 Jun 2016 #43
they told him what he could not pick, labor being one, please keep up swhisper1 Jun 2016 #60
Labor had already been picked and is represented as I posted in another post. nt Demsrule86 Jun 2016 #85
The DNC allowed West and rejected the head of the nurses union-why would they do that? azurnoir Jun 2016 #71
Union leadership is represented on the full platform committee...this is the reason Demsrule86 Jun 2016 #84
The Democratic Party began abandoning labor in the 70's. Beowulf Jun 2016 #45
This. n/t ms liberty Jun 2016 #55
Because neo-liberals don't represent labor. nt LWolf Jun 2016 #46
By their trade deals they have lost a lot of union support EndElectoral Jun 2016 #90
They're only confirming in THIS convention what they started to do in the 1980s... MrMickeysMom Jun 2016 #53
The establishment Democratic Party threw unions under the bus long ago. 99Forever Jun 2016 #56
Because 1-percent own half the country. Octafish Jun 2016 #58
OMG People, Please WAKE UP! n/t ChiciB1 Jun 2016 #61
If you are going that route than another question to ask is why each state LiberalFighter Jun 2016 #83
seems a big deal that the Communication Workers of America now support Hillary azurnoir Jun 2016 #86
Because Labor is an impediment to corporate profit ibegurpard Jun 2016 #87
Unions created the middle class in this country AgingAmerican Jun 2016 #88
Interesting that the AFL-CIO endorsement of Clinton is being so strongly touted azurnoir Jun 2016 #91
Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»The Democratic platform c...»Reply #81