7 thoughts on “An Unsuccessful Parasite”

  1. Enough already with the talk of 47%, having one’s vote bought with gifts, parasites, moochers, the Thatcher quote of “other people’s money”, and the Heinlein quote about “people call that state of affairs bad luck.”

    Unless we want to be in permanent political minority status, we have to emphasize what freedom and liberty and markets have to offer working people, and yes, even people who belong to unions in terms of economic prosperity for all rather than what we intend to take away from people.

    Yes, I know that the “utilitarian” argument for freedom, that free people participating in free markets are better off all round, is frowned upon as not being as ideologically pure as Ayn Randian Objectivism. But most people look after their self interest, as Objectivism seems to suggest they do and should.

    Even if you want to place the blame squarely on the union in this, “parasite” is as unfortunate a choice of word as that favorite union catch-phrase of “scab.” It is the style of the liberal left to place blanket group labels, with the two labels in question applying to working men and women who are doing what they believe they need to do.

    1. Paul, the union organization is the parasite, not the members — the union feeds off the members.

      The host that was killed was the livelihoods of those union members.

  2. Silly customer, you cannot kill a twinkie.

    Of course, there’s no company so successful or state so wealthy that a union can’t bankrupt it.

  3. It’s kind of amusing to see the Teamsters being the voice of reason there, as close as possible to openly berating the Bakers for killing the company rather than taking the contract the Bankruptcy Court imposed on them.

  4. Sigivald said:

    It’s kind of amusing to see the Teamsters being the voice of reason there,

    Not really. They endorsed Reagan in both 1980 and 1984 as well as Bush in 1988.

Comments are closed.