Date: 2008-01-05 02:40 am (UTC)
I didn't say that Ron Paul is against the strike. I said it was your claim that he is. I don't believe that he is against the strike. I believe that he is more concerned with his campaign and with getting his message out, and the strike which is crucial to you was not as important to him. His not bowing to your (writers') desire for him to not go on TV is not the same thing as his being "against" the strike. He has other fish to fry. You guys go ahead and fry yours. I doubt his crossing a picket line will make any real difference to the cause of the writers.

If you have evidence of him having actually spoken against the strike, I would like to hear that now.

I think it is time for independent media to rally and rise. Writers and movie makers will find opportunities to work as long as they continue to create a quality product.

When striking, it is important to hold that ultimate position of power: of being willing to say "take this job and shove it" if you don't get your way. If you are dependent on one particular job for your livelihood, that dependence reduces your negotiating power.

On your other comment about the "corporate camp" platform, I expect that smaller local businesses would spring up to fill the gaps, instead of giant corporations, in the free market environment that Dr Paul favors. Why do you think that corporations would get "more control" and that Christian millionaires would benefit most? What do you envision for the future of health care and public education under a Paul regime? It sounds nightmarish, indeed.
This account has disabled anonymous posting.
If you don't have an account you can create one now.
HTML doesn't work in the subject.
More info about formatting

Profile

liveonearth: (Default)
liveonearth

May 2025

S M T W T F S
    123
45678910
11121314151617
1819202122 2324
25262728293031

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated May. 31st, 2025 12:07 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios