Why should TDOT highway trust fund money be used to finance a mass transit project to begin with?
The trust fund is financed by gas taxes paid by drivers and is supposed to be a user fee to pay for the construction and maintenance of the specific assets they are using - roads and bridges. It isn't supposed to be used to pay for assets that somebody else is using.
Same for the federal gas tax. Currently 20% of federal gas tax funds collected are set aside for mass transit boodoggles, bike paths and other non road projects.
And there is also the matter of the Davis Bacon Act - a purely political giveaway to labor unions that's been going on since the 1930's and results in taxpayers paying for overpriced union labor on every federal construction project.
"An elementary understanding of basic governmental economic relationships with business "
I won't hold my breath waiting for you acquire an elementary understanding of anything remotely related to economics.
"That is as pure as it can possibly be, since your right to flail your fists (i.e. businesses' freedom to associate) ends at my nose (i.e. employees' freedom to associate)."
That's a bogus analogy.
Freedom to associate, like all rights is a negative liberty. It means the government cannot interefere with individuals choosing to associate.
Freedom to associate does not include an affirmative right to require businesses - or anyone else - to asssociate (i.e do business) with your association if they do not voluntartily choose to do so.
"In fact, the constitutionality of The Act was ruled on in 1937. Wanna guess which way it went?"
I know which way it went - incorrectly.
Murder, assault, tresppassing, etc. was against the law then as it is now.
The various levels of government were tasked with enforcing those laws then as they are now.
A failure to do so is no rationale for enacting unconstitutional laws that interfere in freedom of contract.
Some people mistakenly believe that a job is something that they "own" and have a "right" to rather than it being a voluntary contractual agreement to be negotiated between two parties.
"There's one question that hasn't been answered, though, if it's even been asked. Why should Metro have any skin in the game. In other words, why don't the Sounds pay for their own stadium?"
That's a good question.
Another one would be why should Metro government be in the convention center business?
"One last thing, I wish the people who dislike my post above and the ability of American citizens to organize or associate for their best interest in a business setting would state who they are publicly on here. Obviously, we know from his actions the Governor of this state is one of those people. It is clearly unconstitutional to stop these types of actions. Where are the other Tea Party type people on this constitutional issue?"
What Constitutional issue would that be?
The only Constitutional issue is that the federal government had no Constitutional authority to enact the National Labor Relations Act that intereferes in pure freedom of contract in favor of labor unions to begin with.
The pretense that is used to rationalize such things is that the interestate commerce clause allows the government to regulate anything that is claimed to "have an effect" on interstate commerce. That is not what the commerce clause actually says or was understood to mean by those who drafted or ratified it. In the Federalist Papers, both Madison and Hamilton made it clear that the purpose of the commerce clause was to prevent the individual state governments themselves from interefering in the free flow of private commerce, The federal goverment only actually has authority to regulate discrete interstate commerce transactions and nothing else. It does not have any authorty to regulate employment practices.
People who want to form a labor union certainly have freedom of association rights and freedom of contract rights to attempt to do so. However, freedom of association and freedom of contract work in both directions. Business have just as much right to them as people wishing to form a union do.
The NLRA intereferes with those rights. Businesses are required to negotiave with labor unions whether they wish to or not. Businesses have to accept a labor union if the employees vote for it whether they wish to or not. That isn't pure freedom of contract or association.
Interfering in employment contractual negotiations isn't any business of the federal goverment.
All Comments »
The SouthComm Set
The City Paper |
LEO Weekly |
Medical News Papers
All contents © 1995-2013
City Press LLC, 210 12th Ave. S., Ste. 100, Nashville, TN 37203. (615) 244-7989.
All rights reserved. No part of this service may be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of City Press LLC,
except that an individual may download and/or forward articles via email to a reasonable number of recipients for personal, non-commercial purposes.
Powered by Foundation