US Presidential Candidates

I often wonder why progressives can understand the sociopathy that tends to infect leaders of large corporations but fail to understand that large unions and governments are subject to the same tendency?

Large groups of people lose their individual connection to individuals and behave in ways that may best be described as herd behavior. They adopt common ideas and goals. They gravitate towards the same clubs and associations. They spend time together with others in their in group. I believe T2M's post about the self segregation from those that believe differently works in full force for leaders of large organizations.

They aren't sociopaths in the clinical sense, but they are so unconnected with most people as to make the effect difficult to differentiate from true sociopathy.

biochem wrote:

Dayrl wrote:The theme here is union thugs, and the corrupt union movement. Out of hundreds of unions here, one had three corrupt officials, and another has been accused of stand over tactics. However the Murdock paper & TV line is that all are corrupt thugs, and checking the USA & UK papers it's the same line.
Unfortunately if you repeat lies often enough the sheeple believe them, so union official = thug.

What I've observed is that it tends to be a function of the size of the unions. The large unions seem to be run by the same sociopaths that run big business and big government. Big just seems to attract these types. However, I find it more of a betrayal when it is the unions because they are supposed to be on your side and when you see them behaving in exactly the same me first fashion as the big business/big government sociopaths....

I think it was last year I was commenting on union leaders ending up just as bad as politicians. Power corrupts etc.
At the moment down here they're going through a clean phase. (which is part of the irony)

Carly Fiorina huh?
Desperate play for votes and relevence or setting up for a contested convention? (or both or something else)

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk

I don't think whatever the goal he had in mind by naming her will work. Cruz is simply too unlikable.

Annachie wrote:I think it was last year I was commenting on union leaders ending up just as bad as politicians. Power corrupts etc.
At the moment down here they're going through a clean phase. (which is part of the irony)

Carly Fiorina huh?
Desperate play for votes and relevence or setting up for a contested convention? (or both or something else)

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk

Annachie wrote:Carly Fiorina huh?
Desperate play for votes and relevence or setting up for a contested convention? (or both or something else)

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk

I saw a headline, "CARLY'S BACK!" and was excited until I read it and found out that there was no new album from Carly Simon.

Annachie wrote:
Both have been gone for more than 25 years.

In the last few years I think maybe 5 union officials have been done on corruption charges, maybe less.
And about 35 right wing ELECTED politicions.
But the right wing government is screaming union corruption and running investigation after investigation into the subject.
Meanwhile senior members of said government get done on corruption and abuse of privlige.

Standard procedure for rightwing politicos.
And usually only for them for the simple reason that media doesn´t let leftwing politicos get away with such insanely obvious lies if they ever try.

This got posted over at the bar and got the reception I expected.

Curious to see what is said here, if anything?

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/201 ... wage-goes/

T2M

I suspect this is largely politics. His statement was positive to the idea but waffled an enormous amount. The point I believe is that he wanted to provide an example why he was NOT like the normal Republican candidate.

thinkstoomuch wrote:This got posted over at the bar and got the reception I expected.

Curious to see what is said here, if anything?

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/201 ... wage-goes/

T2M

I suppose the real telling point is does the Trump companies that he has control over (presumably all of them) pay minimum wage or over minimum wage?
Deeds not words.





Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk

Only something like 5% of all jobs in the US pay minimum wage. Odds are he does pay more for almost the jobs he offers.

Annachie wrote:I suppose the real telling point is does the Trump companies that he has control over (presumably all of them) pay minimum wage or over minimum wage?
Deeds not words.





Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk

Lol, jobs that aren't "minimum wage" clearly don't count if we are curious how he treats his minimum wage workers.

I am, however, starting to think that over here in Oz we have both more workers that would be consideted minimum wage, and a greater flow on effect of changes to that minimum wage due to the way the whole wages thing is worked out.

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk