0acacdb8   
   XPost: alt.activism, alt.politics.republican, alt.politics.conservative   
   From: tim.howard@suddenlink.net   
      
   On 3/23/2011 5:28 PM, Stan de SD wrote:   
   > On Mar 22, 11:23 pm, Tim Howard  wrote:   
   >> On 3/22/2011 7:48 AM, Stan de SD wrote:   
   >>   
   >>> On Mar 20, 12:08 pm, Tim Howard    wrote:   
   >>   
   >>>> It certainly is not.  You think businesses are entitled to stay in   
   >>>> business?  Businesses need to do what their customers want in order to   
   >>>> stay in business.  Those union members are their customers.   
   >>   
   >>> You are confused on many issues, Timmy...   
   >>   
   >> My name is not Timmy.   
   >>   
   >> And what in my above statement is not factual?   
   >   
   > Union members are NOT the customers of businesses. Union members may   
   > be their employees, which could be interpreted as in effect being   
   > vendors of labor services, but they are certainly NOT "customers". You   
   > are apparently confused about many things...   
   >   
   >> Why did you snip everything else I wrote?   
   >   
   > I snip most of it because it's long-winded drivel that is irrelevant   
   > to the central point of the discussion.   
      
   You can't define the central point of the discussion.  Now how do you   
   know whether or not a union member is a customer of some business?  If   
   someone patronizes a business, they are a customer, plain and simple.   
   If that person is also a union member, then that business has a customer   
   that is a union member, plain and simple.  Union members are regular   
   people who shop at the same places everyone else does.  There money is   
   the same as anyone elses money.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)