NetNews Usenet Archive 1993 #3/NN_1993_3.iso/spool/can/politics/11711

Internet Message Format | 1993-01-27 | 2.8 KB

Xref: sparky can.politics:11711 soc.culture.canada:10399
Newsgroups: can.politics,soc.culture.canada
Path: sparky!uunet!think.com!paperboy.osf.org!enterpoop.mit.edu!bloom-picayune.mit.edu!athena.mit.edu!cmk
From: [e-mail] (Charles M Kozierok)
Subject: Re: NDP "communism?" (was Re: A vote for Reform...)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (News system)
Nntp-Posting-Host: vongole.mit.edu
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 15:46:29 GMT
Lines: 45

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (John G. Spragge) writes:
>In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Charles M
>Kozierok) says:
>
>>and didn't Comrade Rae just author legislation which would allow
>>for certification with only *40%* support? how is that justified
>>(assuming it is true, not 100% sure)?
>
>The 40% relates to people who have actually signed a union card.
>The legislation assumes that if 40% of the workers have actually
>joined the union, the rest will accept representation from it.
>
>You can argue that represents a naive view of group dynamics, but I
>don't consider it "vicious" in any sense of the word.

i do. isn't the middle word in Rae's party's name "Democratic"?

>>i forget all the other details of the NDP's vicious anti-business
>>labor laws. maybe it is the result of subconscious repression; they made
>>me almost literally ill when i first read about them. and then he wonders
>>why businesses are leaving the country. the man is the biggest
>>ass ever to hold office.
>
>I ask again, who's "business"? The most controversial feature of this
>law involved the prohibition on using scab labour for strike-breaking.
>That may cause a problem for senior commercial bureaucrats, but it
>won't lead to much trouble for the owners (mostly workers themselves),
>the line workers (who actually make the products), entrepreneurs, or
>customers.
>
>As its principal effect, this legislation should increase productivity
>by forcing the distribution of the power (and salary) in most enterprises
>down the "pyramid", away from the bureaucrats at the top, and towards
>the workers. And that, (as we see in the Japanese example) will likely
>result in a more productive enterprise.

i can't argue with you because i don't have access to a list of the
specific legislation that Rae has proposed/enacted over his term.
i am going from memory, which is not a particularly strong basis
for argument. if some kind soul can send or point me to a detailed list of
his legislation, i'd be more than happy to provide the explanations
that go with my negative sentiment.

--
charles