Virginia, which direction do you want to go? (Bristol: school, living in)

[Tyler_Jolie-Pitt]

I'm worried that moderate Republicans don't really exist in the South anymore...

[gemstone1]

Originally Posted by rural & red

^ So many assumptions about a person you've never met. That, I consider sad and inconsiderate. How progressive and tolerant of you.

What's good for business is good for the economy and what's good for the economy is good for people. It's not rocket science. Scare away business and there will be no jobs left. To call that view purely self-interested is a misunderstanding (or misconstrue) of intent.

See, that's the problem with the world today. People think that folks on the other side have ill intent towards some group or another and so it's fair to shame them. I do not think rank-and-file liberals have ill intent, I just disagree with their methodology and the results speak for themselves. Stop viewing this dynamic through a myopic lens of us vs. them.

Constructive criticism accepted, I was over the top, sorry. However the so called "right to work" is a misnomer...it should be called the "right to pay less".

Regards
Gemstone1

[Bigfoot424]

That what you will of this group but this article does make sense. When I was discussing the union vs RTW I came across this article. From 2011 but still pretty spot on. https://www.heritage.org/jobs-and-la...bs-and-choices

[rural & red]

I know this is going to sound hyperbolic, and it is, but let me explain...

Big Labor is organized crime.

When the unions interfere in labor disputes they take power away from individuals and their employers. The best negotiation tactic an employee has with their employer, is themselves. When unions interfere they tend to use bullying tactics that dissuade an employer from truly settling a dispute with an employee. So, the employer, in effect, does just enough to appease the unions and no more -- their primary concern being to reduce the chance of political backlash or blackmail.

The primary tactic of strong unions is of intimidation. In some parts of the country they also use extortion, bribery, death threats, etc. They have been historically tied to other organized crime outfits like the Mafia.

The union bosses get rich while the employee makes just enough to survive but not so much to truly thrive in today's competitive, skill-based job market. It creates too much dependency that cannot be maintained without more concerted labor union interference -- the negative feedback continues to spiral down and down.

Eventually an employer that is beleaguered by union bullying will move and set up shop elsewhere. The union then does nothing to support that employee that now lost his or her job or can't find another one because the rampant union activity scared off other potential employers.

In effect, the unions talk the talk but don't walk the walk. They "support" the employee when things are conducive to lining to their own pockets but leave them to dust when not.

The Right-to-Work law says that unions cannot force employees of a company to pay membership dues or risk losing their job. It also says that labor representation will still take place for employees who are not paying union dues. Sure, this effectively weakens the labor unions but what it also does is give the employer and employee more options for settling disputes that truly appease both sides and not just the middleman.

In the real world, an employee is working for a company at will. Either the employee or employer can end the business relationship when needed. If an employee feels they are unjustly paid and cannot get their existing employer to pay up, they are free to move on to a different employer.

You can't argue with the fact that states with Right-to-Work laws receive greater business investment than those that let unions call all of the shots. This creates more better paying jobs and levels the playing field for those without as many skills but who may have the desire to acquire them and move up. This is better for the little guy.

Why do you think Amazon chose to move to Northern Virginia and not Maryland or decided to leave NY, even after accepting a proposal there? Because Virginia is still a Right-to-Work state.

Unionized firms have lower profits and do not create nearly as many high-paying jobs as nonunionized firms. For nonunionized firms, that's more money to spread around to company and compensate employees who are competitive and must be retained.

[gemstone1]

"You can't argue with the fact that states with Right-to-Work laws receive greater business investment than those that let unions call all of the shots."....I can, and do.
How do you want to measure it, by GDP, by Union affiliation ?

"Unionized firms have lower profits and do not create nearly as many high-paying jobs as nonunionized firms."

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt....while I await data to back up your talking points, but in the mean time, here is something to read.

Union decline lowers wages of nonunion workers
The overlooked reason why wages are stuck and inequality is growing. link

"The Right-to-Work law..... also does is give the employer and employee more options for settling disputes that truly appease both sides and not just the middleman".....Oh, you mean mandated arbitration, with the employer choosing the arbitrator....what kind of track record does that have ?

Regards
Gemstone1

[NOVAmtneer82]

Terry McAuliffe (who yes has flip flopped on the right-to-work laws) has said himself the General Assembly will not pass it- there simply isn't enough support for repealing it even from many moderate Democrats. I support us keeping right-to-work in place- the last thing we need to become is Maryland, New York, etc.

[The Dissenter]

Originally Posted by Serious Conversation

I think VA is in a fairly good position.

It's somewhat socially liberal, but still moderate taxes and business friendly. I'm pro marijuana. I have no issues with people owning firearms with reasonable restrictions. I also don't think it should be "anything goes" with guns. I want some guardrails on capitalism to help moderate the business cycle.

I think I would fall in line with your view. Northam is not someone I’m ride or die with but he’s done far more right than wrong.

I’m not terribly excited about McAuliffe. I’d rather Northam have another term than give a retread who didn’t do anything memorable for the state.

[rural & red]

I agree that Northam has been better than Terry M, at least on the fiscal side. He is fairly conservative on matters of money but socially liberal. I can live with that.

Terry is moving too far to the left for me on economic matters and taxes to feel comfortable with, plus I always prefer native Virginians.

[VA Yankee]

You can keep saying you don't like Terry M that's fine but when is Younkin going to step up and tell us what he plans? More importantly where does he stand with the Republican Partys line over the election and January 6th seeing the former President is now endorsing him?

[S6T1R]

To answer OP: the direction of Governor Youngkin. Vote Glenn.