Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site mnetor.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utcsri!utcs!mnetor!clewis
From: clewis@mnetor.UUCP
Newsgroups: can.politics
Subject: Re: Spot the difference
Message-ID: <2872@mnetor.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 7-Jan-86 14:12:09 EST
Article-I.D.: mnetor.2872
Posted: Tue Jan  7 14:12:09 1986
Date-Received: Tue, 7-Jan-86 15:02:05 EST
References: <130@ubc-cs.UUCP> <2247@hcrvx2.UUCP> <1021@lsuc.UUCP>
Reply-To: clewis@mnetor.UUCP (Chris Lewis)
Distribution: can
Organization: Computer X (CANADA) Ltd., Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Lines: 39
Keywords: company, union, inflammatory, capitalist, socialist
Summary: 

In article <1021@lsuc.UUCP> jimomura@lsuc.UUCP (Jim Omura) writes:
>
>     2 recent posting have state there are differences between Union
>and Company money based of the fact that the Worker was forced to
>pay Union Dues whereas the Company is spending it's own money.  This
>fails to recognize the fact that the Company's shareholders may not
>want company money going to a particular party.  If the shareholder
>is in the minority then his/her choice is to buy out the majority
>or sell his/her shares.  That's not much different then the worker
>having to quit a job.  Not a matter of *no* difference, but not clearly
>as black and white a difference.  Again, I see no reason for allowing
>a tax deduction for it.

There is a huge difference: what happens if, in the industrial
sector you are working in, there is only one union?  If you don't like
who the plumbers union is donating *your* money to, the only option 
available may be to quit, and thereby lose the ability to support your 
family.  Because, defacto, you cannot work as a plumber anywhere in 
Ontario without belonging to THAT union, and it will take years to get 
to the same salary in another sector.  Jim, closer to home, how would
you like it if your professional dues (via executive fiat, or even
open vote) went to an organization (think about neo-nazis for a moment
f'r instance) that you felt was intolerable.  Do you think that having 
to quit the practice of law (at least in this province) and waste all 
those years of law school would be the only way to avoid having to 
(by default) support such contributions?

Even if your shares are in a monopoly (eg: if the post office issued shares), 
at least you can move your money to a different company (it makes little 
difference to a share what the industry is).  Nor will it affect your
ability to support your family (unless of course the new shares go belly up).

[disclaimer: I do not intend to imply that the law society supports, or
I think they support, any particular group.  The example given in this item
is purely for the purposes of example]
-- 
Chris Lewis,
UUCP: {allegra, linus, ihnp4}!utzoo!mnetor!clewis
BELL: (416)-475-8980 ext. 321