Sanders, Kaptur introduce bill to restore retirement security for 10 million

Discussion in 'Central States Pension Fund Discussion' started by Freightmaster1, May 9, 2017.

  1. henry j

    henry j Banned

    Messages:
    1,037
    Likes Received:
    1,018
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Let me remind you that you had 2 choices at the ballot box last November. Yeah, I know there were a few more, but they were just taking up spapce on the ballot. So realistcally you could have voted for Hillary, Trump or stayed home. Choice #1 and choice #3 were not an option, so let's make the best of what we have. The Dems are not about to let that happen. They would rather see the govenment fail completely. It's all about POWER for them. They don't care a rip about what's best for the country.
     
  2. henry j

    henry j Banned

    Messages:
    1,037
    Likes Received:
    1,018
    Trophy Points:
    113
    No, I won't. Just like you believe.....Question authority.
     
  3. henry j

    henry j Banned

    Messages:
    1,037
    Likes Received:
    1,018
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I think it was Julious Ceasar....and we know what happened to HIM !
     
  4. Elwood

    Elwood Question Authority

    Messages:
    3,214
    Likes Received:
    2,579
    Trophy Points:
    113
    As with Kaiser/Frazer, this too shall pass.
     
  5. mysticobra

    mysticobra Just here.

    Messages:
    2,307
    Likes Received:
    2,611
    Trophy Points:
    113
    He questioned authority.

    Elwoods motto.
    :1sm057crazy:
     
  6. jimmy g

    jimmy g Kook

    Messages:
    16,130
    Likes Received:
    8,306
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The entire thread should have been started only in the Politics or CSPF forums. It's political posturing. Nothing to do with YRC.
     
    Elwood likes this.
  7. SAC75

    SAC75 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,883
    Likes Received:
    1,612
    Trophy Points:
    113
    So why bring it up?
     
  8. Elwood

    Elwood Question Authority

    Messages:
    3,214
    Likes Received:
    2,579
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Being argumentative is not questioning authority.

    The origins of my 'motto' are with Thomas Jefferson.

    "If a law is unjust, a man is not only right to disobey it, he is obligated to do so!"

    Understand the meaning before applying to unrelated context.
     
    jimmy g and Triplex like this.
  9. mysticobra

    mysticobra Just here.

    Messages:
    2,307
    Likes Received:
    2,611
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yes sir.
     
  10. henry j

    henry j Banned

    Messages:
    1,037
    Likes Received:
    1,018
    Trophy Points:
    113
    "Give me the liberty to know, to utter, and to argue freely according to conscience, above all liberties" John Milton

    " There can be no progress without head-on confrontation" Christopher Hitchens
     
  11. Elwood

    Elwood Question Authority

    Messages:
    3,214
    Likes Received:
    2,579
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Absolutely!! Continue your arguement.
    Just move to the appropriate forum.
     
  12. henry j

    henry j Banned

    Messages:
    1,037
    Likes Received:
    1,018
    Trophy Points:
    113
    OK. It's a done deal, but there never was an "argument". Just like Chris Hitchens once said, It was a "head-on confrontation"

    "Culturally, one of the best arguments we can make is, wait and see" .....Os Guinness

    "We seldom learn much from someone with whom we agree"....Mokokoma Mokhonoana
    (and don't ask me who the hell Mokokoma is !!) All I know is the wisdom in his words.
     
    Last edited: May 14, 2017
  13. Elwood

    Elwood Question Authority

    Messages:
    3,214
    Likes Received:
    2,579
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I prefer an exercise in civility.

    I have no issue with what you have to say, only where you say it.
     
    jimmy g likes this.
  14. mud

    mud Wonderin'

    Messages:
    7,914
    Likes Received:
    4,856
    Trophy Points:
    113
    As the moderators have been telling us for years.
     
    jimmy g likes this.
  15. vongrimmenstein

    vongrimmenstein Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,946
    Likes Received:
    1,658
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The should have put the pads on him, stood him up, lashed his belly to the crossbar, leaving his hands & feet free, and allowed the Minnesota Wild or any High School travel team from say Hibbing MN, have a full practice session. Mask & cup optional.
     
    henry j likes this.
  16. henry j

    henry j Banned

    Messages:
    1,037
    Likes Received:
    1,018
    Trophy Points:
    113
    QUOTE="Elwood, post: 1160578, member: 192"]Being argumentative is not questioning authority.



    The origins of my 'motto' are with Thomas Jefferson.

    "If a law is unjust, a man is not only right to disobey it, he is obligated to do so!"

    Understand the meaning before applying to unrelated context.[/QUOTE]
    I have one more thing to say about your interpretation of the Thomas Jefferson quote you use as your motto, then I will "Let sleeping dogs lay"
    Qoutes on the subject of law by men far more intelligent and far sighted than me are below.
    "We are a nation of laws, not of men".....John Adams
    "No man is above the law and no man is below it :Nor do we ask any man's permission when we ask him to obey it" Theodore Roosevelt
    "I will obey every law, or submit to the penalty"....Chief Joseph

    To do anything less than obey all laws as written, then we become like Hillary Clinton who believes in only obeying laws that she chooses to obey.
    If an American citizen does not like any particular law, then they are free to take peaceful action to try to change that law, not openly disobey it.......................... :poke:....:stirthepot:....:usa:
     
    Last edited: May 15, 2017
  17. henry j

    henry j Banned

    Messages:
    1,037
    Likes Received:
    1,018
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I like the way you think. A bit more of that kind of justice and crime would drop like a rock.
     
  18. Triplex

    Triplex Experienced stalker

    Messages:
    9,386
    Likes Received:
    7,214
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I totally disagree. Anyone is free to disobey any law. However, no one is necessarily free of suffering the consequences of that.

    Like I said to a dispatcher a long time ago - "You can't make me do something I don't want to do, you can only (possibly) punish me for not doing it."
     
  19. henry j

    henry j Banned

    Messages:
    1,037
    Likes Received:
    1,018
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That is what Chief Joseph said.
    Anyone is "free" to do anything he (or she) wants, but if that "something" is against the written laws in this country, they may not be "free" for long.
    Do the crime, expect to do the time.
     
  20. henry j

    henry j Banned

    Messages:
    1,037
    Likes Received:
    1,018
    Trophy Points:
    113
    (I hesitate to call any dispatcher a superior or an official, but it is what it is) Anyhow, comparing a refusal to do something a dispatcher tells you to do is completely different from refusing to comply with a written law.
    The first one can get you fired for insubordination. The second can get you fined and/or thrown in jail.
    In my working days, I was in conflict with dispatchers a lot over what they said they wanted me to do. The way I handled a disagreement was to get a steward or at least another union "brother" to be a witness to what I was being ordered to do, especially if it meant violating union work rules or safety. If it violated work rules concerning job protections of another member, I let it be known that there would be grievances filed on it by that other member and money would be paid. The steward, BA or other union person present would be witnesses. If it was a safety issue, I refused on those terms, a safety concern, with a witness present. I made sure I was on the clock when all this was taking place, taking pictures of the safety issue, noting the whole thing on my trip sheet complete with time clock punches and names of dispatcher and witness. Documentation, names of witnesses and supervisors and requests of signatures on the trip sheet does amazing things. (On one occasion, en-route to another terminal,a trailer wheel and hub broke on a trailer haz mat load that was maxed out on wt.. Central dispatch wanted me to get a chain and have a mechanic chain up the front axle of that trailer tandem and take it another 60 miles to a repair shop putting all the weight on just one axle. I told them it was too much weight and Haz Mat. They said to do it anyhow. I called the nearest State Trooper office. They said if they saw it, it would result in a BIG fine for both me and the company. I got the Sgt.'s name and called Cent Disp back. They got pissed, but that trlr didn't move until that hub and both wheels were replaced. I made my point. Once all this was done, not a single time was I forced to do something that involved safety violations, over-weight violations or anything that would have meant a grievance pay-out for someone else. They ALWAYS backed down when it came to a company official signing off (literally) on what I considered unsafe or a work rules violation.
    They really hate to actually sign their name to anything. They would much rather be able to pass the blame off onto someone else if there was a pay-out , an equipment violation by the DOT or an accident. I even had one of them say to me, "We just want to get it out the gate. After that, it's your responsibility". I thought.."OK, we'll just put the responsibility back where it belongs before it goes out the gate". Sadly, dispatch used intimidation to get someone else to take equip with safety issues.
    On the written law issue......it's pretty simple. The law is the law until somebody changes it. If you choose to break the law, be prepared to pay the price. As a judge once told ME, "Ignorance of the law is no excuse.... Guilty....... Pay the bailiff" ................ Next case.
     
    Last edited: May 16, 2017

Share This Page