i don't know enough about the plans to say whether they are good or bad but i have noticed that you (Nathan) seem to be very involved with unions. get over it. unions are so 1903.

Zero-- What a ridiculous statement. Unionization was actually relatively low in 1903-- if you were even going to make an intelligent slam, you'd say "unions are so 1937", the year of its most radical growth, or "union are so 1955", the year of the highest density for unionization in the country.

But the reality is that the whole history of unions has been of cycles of attack, resistance, with conservatives always declaring them "irrelevant" in the new economic era. Back in the 1920s, with the stock market bubbling, and employers promoting an "American Plan" of enlightened employer treatment of employees, unions were also declared old hat. Yet it was followed by the upsurge of the 1930s.

Yeah, Nathan, you're always talking about "elections." Well, get over it. Elections are so 20th-century.

At a time of growing inequality, stagnating real wages, many unsafe workplaces, unfair trade agreements hurting workers here and in the developing world, and a political system dominated by corporate interests, unions are very necessary in today's society.

Umm, on the topic of killing the protection of Civil Service workers in DoD, I think it's a good idea, at least at the lower echelons. I just got out of the military, and one of the biggest pains in doing stuff was dealing with career Civil Service folks, who were dependably lazy because they had too much job security. Once you pass a certain mark, it would make sense (protection), since you wield a bit more power and authority, but rank and file Civil Servants should not be given the cloak of protection to hide behind.

It's to bad ryan had those experiences. I used to work for DFAS, let me tell you, those people work HARD. The one thing about civil service that is true, is it is relatively low paying. I quit and almost doubled my salary.

Ryan,

The big problem with ending Civil Service in DoD is that there's a long track record of insider dealing and outright thievery of the public purse -- generals retiring to become lobbyists, members of corporate boards "advising" the Pentagon on procurement. Just look at the Boeing refueler lease deal, which cost us taxpayers more than buying the planes outright! Civil Service rules keep the rot from advancing past the head. Without the rules, the DoD could become the world's largest Patronage Palace -- and then the employees would be less competent, and they would only work hard in the interests of their patrons -- who wouldn't be the average Joe or Jane in uniform.

unions were important in the very early part of the 20th century as a way for progressives to break the voting alliance between labor and the industrial upper class (i.e. capitalist class) which had allowed conservative republicans to dominate everywhere except rural areas of the midwest and the south.

by 1937 or 1955 they were not nearly as important. now that they comprise only 13% of the workforce unions are important even less so and furthermore they have the tendency to push progressives into stupid policies of social conservatism, anti-free trade, centralizated government, anti-immigration and anti-environmentalism.