"Dan Clore" > wrote in message
...
> zztop8970 wrote:
> > "G*rd*n" > wrote in message
> > ...
> :
> >>
> >>>>>Why would any company want their employees following organized crime
> >>>>>thugs?
>
> >>"G*rd*n" >:
> >>
> >>>>One modest regular payment to the OCTs, and, voilà!
> >>>>Labor peace. Did you really need to ask?
> >>
> >>"zztop8970" >:
> >>
> >>>That's not an answer to the question he asked, but to a different
> >>>question - "what are the benefits of paying the union, once workers
have
> >>>unionized".
> >>>But, thnaks for conceding that a union is nothing more than a
> > "protection"
> >>>scam.
> >>
> >>I simply answered wrjames's question directly.
> >
> > No , you didn't. The question was why wold a company want thier
employees to
> > unionize. Your answer is not a response to that question. Your reading
> > skills leave much to be desired.
>
> No, the question was "Why would any company want their
> employees following organized crime thugs?"
>
> On its face, this has nothing at all to do with unionizing.

In the context, it is obvious that WmJames was referring to unions as
"organized crime thugs".
This usage of context to infer meanings is usually mastered by 6th grade. It
is never too late to take a class in remedial reading.