Trudeau dictatorship was seen coming 7 years ago, by the Huffington Post

[Bradskii]

Nope...it's your claim. I'm not doing your work for you.

If it's an emergency...explain how.

I'm not making a claim. I'm giving you the facts. So yet again...it's termed a 'state of emergency'. I know what that means. You've been discussing it for a while and you don't know what it means? That's something that you need to find out. Let me know when you do.

 

[rambot]

And you expect what exactly? They'll come out and explain why they were wrong and should be thrown in jail for gross abuse of their authority?

Who is "they"? ARe you aware of who would complete the inquiry? DO you know what body is in charge or over seeing it?

I imagine these answers are "no". But you already seem so confident in an outcome when you don't even know how that outcome will be arrived upon.

 

[rambot]

N


You're claiming that multiple truck drivers belonged to fascist organizations?

Should be easy to provide evidence for....let's see it.

I found this interesting:
The Alt-Right on Facebook Are Hijacking Canada’s Trucker Blockade

Offline, 90 percent of Canadian truckers are vaccinated and the Canadian Trucking Alliance, which represents the industry in the country and does not support the convoy, has said most of the people in and around the protests “do not have a connection to the trucking industry.”

Ultimately, the whole concept about this being behind "truck drivers" is a false, and damp squib.
You could also PROOOOOBABLY argue that the 11 folks arrested with a weapons cache at the Alberta border crossing were looking for trouble.

That was another poster's claim when I asked him what the emergency was.

Huh. The poster you quoted said nothing of the sort and, I took a quick scan over the last page or two and I saw no poster saying that.

I was being hyperbolic. It's really just another example of the left's descent into authoritarian politics in western democracies.

LOL!
"I was being hyperbolic".... but it's another concrete example of exactly what I said.

 

[Gregory Thompson]

Any evidence that these truckers are actually fascists?

I'm not going to give much weight to a 10 year old pic of one dressed as Hitler for Halloween.

I'm asking how many of them are actual members of fascist organizations?

If I knew that, would I be chatting online?

 

[Ana the Ist]

For the record, I'm also not convinced it was needed. I thoroughly am looking forward to the required governmental review to occur as well as the CCLA's pursuits to clarify whether it was appropriate.

Uh huh.

I am fully willing to abide by what these organizations land on.

I don't understand what this means.

I freaken hated the protests. I had no respect for their ethos or purpose. I fundamentally disagreed with their message.

I find that difficult to believe.

It would require you to have your own ethos that is in contradiction with theirs.

I don't think you're going to admit that you are against "bodily autonomy" or "the right to peaceful protest" as characterized by a lack of violence or even "economic protests" that range from boycotts of businesses and entire nations to sit-ins that surround businesses and make sales difficult.

I'm fairly certain that you are actually in favor of all these things...as long as they are from the side you support.

Don't confuse that with an ethos. If you genuinely held the belief in the right of people to do these things....there's no way you could justify Trudeau's actions here.

If you're ethos involves only supporting the rights of those who agree with you...and the suppression of anyone who disagrees...

Then your ethos is "power justifies anything".

That's authoritarianism/totalitarianism.

BUT, I DO agree that they have every right to protest, and even disrupt THE GOVERNMENT as they see fit. I have been to "many" protests in my life and it is an important part of a democracy.

Do you?

I do not agree with their messaging. I do not agree with their behaviours early on. I DO believe they were trying to make the racists a side message (or to chase them off entirely). Of course many of those people did nothing about the other insignia they were cutely (or acutely) unaware of.

I don't know about the racist/fascists at this protest.

If you don't mind me putting forth a little guess though....

Are you familiar with the term "accelerationist"? The white supremacists who have been denied the ability to openly protest in the US (because frankly, the left decided that allowing Antifa to assault them was a good idea) didn't just disappear.

They have successfully infiltrated many political movements and organizations on both sides of the aisle. They are keenly aware that their presence at a protest allows them to either sway it toward violence or discredit it's legitimacy... if they make themselves visible.

That's because they believe that we are headed towards a collapse and they figure the sooner it happens (because the left is intent on drawing up racial lines and pushing tribalism) the better. After all, it won't matter what your politics are once it turns into a fight....if you're targeted for being white, then your only safe option is to join the whites.

Whether or not you agree with the conclusion that believe...it's a direct result of the whole "punch a nazi" and constant defense of Antifas tactics.

They switched tactics. Now they're at every protest....making them all look bad....and it doesn't matter if you understand why. It provides further justification for the increasing political divide.

Ultimately, I used something called empathy. I thought "if a bunch of semis parked in my crescent and didn't move for 4 weeks and honked their horns at all times of day and night, I would be mad as ....expletive for sure." To the point where I don't actually care if the Emergencies Act was invoked if it meant they would get moved. And don't even get me started on our ineffectual, not quite subte enough racist/biased leaders in Alberta.

This would be exacerbated if those same people had the audacity to then hassle ME in MY crescent for making appropriate health based decisions; badger and cajole me.

Uh huh....here's the thing.

I watched in 2020 when people used more traditional tactics to protest the lockdowns of businesses that year. They were called racists, alt-right, and so on...

Regardless of whether or not you agreed with them....the current data coming out shows they were right. The lockdowns saved a tiny number of people....but caused economic devastation, multiple issues related to physical and mental health, and many of these issues aren't even fixable.

All to keep the death rate from climbing maybe 1-2%.

It was a huge mistake. That's why even if you disagree....perhaps you should still support the rights of those who you disagree with. It's going to turn out they were correct some of the time.

 

[Ana the Ist]

I'm not making a claim.

You are.

I'm giving you the facts.

Well facts are something that exist independently of opinion. If you have evidence of your claim, provide it.

I feel pretty confident that you don't.

 

[rambot]

Uh huh.
I don't understand what this means.

It means I trust the process and I will make my ultimate decision based on their findings. I mean, I don't vote for Trudeau and I don't much care for him as a leader. I am ALSO confident he wouldn't have any big asperations of dictatorship anything which is why commetns like that make me laugh goodly.

I find that difficult to believe.

It would require you to have your own ethos that is in contradiction with theirs.

I don't think you're going to admit that you are against "bodily autonomy" or "the right to peaceful protest" as characterized by a lack of violence or even "economic protests" that range from boycotts of businesses and entire nations to sit-ins that surround businesses and make sales difficult.

Bodily autonomy? While that may have been the impetous for them leaving, it became a "richer" argument than just that and it's illogical to suggest otherwise. They left BC as "antivax" but by the time they got to Alberta they were "anti everything COVID related" and that is NOT bodily autonomy. Regardless, quite a few companies just shifted routes so those people who wouldn't get vaxxed did national or provincial routes so it was a nonissue.

I'm fairly certain that you are actually in favor of all these things...as long as they are from the side you support.

What I am favour of, and really my main point, is a government that is consistent in how it deals with protests.

Left wing activists have seen this protest get kitglove treatment for quite a while. We are happy to see them treated as our activists have been treated by successive governments.

It's hilarious to me that you think this is a "new" outcome. Perhaps between the two of us we could remember a time when a protest against the government was fruitful (against either the Canadian or American government). But I can't. It is the habit of government to quash protest however they need to. This has been happening in Canada since its inception.

Generally, this may be one of the first truly "right wing" protests this country has seen. Certainly the first meaningful one in a long time. So when right wingers say "Canada is disrespecting its citizens and taking away rights", I have to laugh at their ignorance. And then I shake my head at the fact that those same people almost ALWAYS were first to encourage police action against people THEY disagree with too. So, if the government is going to quash it, then yes, I think they need to do it for both sides of the political spectrum.

So ultimately, what you are accusing the left in Canada of, has actually been in practice by the right for LITERALLY decades.

If you don't mind me putting forth a little guess though....

Are you familiar with the term "accelerationist"? The white supremacists who have been denied the ability to openly protest in the US (because frankly, the left decided that allowing Antifa to assault them was a good idea) didn't just disappear.

They have successfully infiltrated many political movements and organizations on both sides of the aisle. They are keenly aware that their presence at a protest allows them to either sway it toward violence or discredit it's legitimacy... if they make themselves visible.

That's because they believe that we are headed towards a collapse and they figure the sooner it happens (because the left is intent on drawing up racial lines and pushing tribalism) the better. After all, it won't matter what your politics are once it turns into a fight....if you're targeted for being white, then your only safe option is to join the whites.
They switched tactics. Now they're at every protest....making them all look bad....and it doesn't matter if you understand why. It provides further justification for the increasing political divide.

So these accelerationists have inflitrated both sides of the aisle but they NOT a problem with the right side of the aisle because why?
Hey, I'm totally on board with the idea that there are many people who are keen to create chaos.

Whether or not you agree with the conclusion that believe...it's a direct result of the whole "punch a nazi" and constant defense of Antifas tactics.

1) No. It's a strategy they employ to advance their goals. You seem to be trying to make Nazis out into victims.
Dare to dream. The world would be a MUCH Better place with no nazis in it.

They switched tactics. Now they're at every protest....making them all look bad....and it doesn't matter if you understand why. It provides further justification for the increasing political divide.

So you missed the part when these accelerationists were the organizers and leaders of this protest?

Uh huh....here's the thing.

I watched in 2020 when people used more traditional tactics to protest the lockdowns of businesses that year. They were called racists, alt-right, and so on...

Regardless of whether or not you agreed with them....the current data coming out shows they were right. The lockdowns saved a tiny number of people....but caused economic devastation, multiple issues related to physical and mental health, and many of these issues aren't even fixable.

Catagorically false. The "current data" you quote, as far as I know is the John Hopkin's study that is about as reliable a rapid antigen test and CLEARLY and certainly rigged to provide certain results. And contradicts the results of NUMEROUS other studies that show the opposite.
Again, outliers are NOT the "star" studies you want to hitch your wagon to.

If there are other stronger studies, I'd love to hear about them because I ahven't seen any.

To be clear, I'm not arguing what happenned was perfect and should NOT be different. I'm also not saying they were "worth" it Because I'm not personally ready to put a set number of lives I'm willing to lose. COVID already was the single most deadly ANYTHING to happen in America by orders of magnitude I believe right?

I AM arguing that they WORKED. In regards to future pandemics, I would advocate that we don't take either side of the political aisle here in North America but instead turn to Asian countries with track records of success to see what they did to manage that and emulate it.

 

[Aldebaran]

And the "emergency" apparently is "covid" so there's nothing wrong with Trudeau declaring himself dictator for life until this emergency has ended.

Yep! In fact, it seems like there's a "state of emergency" being declared pretty much everywhere and all the time. But it took a Russian military invasion for Ukraine to declare one, while it only took working class Canadian truckers camping out for it to happen in Canada.

 

[Bradskii]

Well facts are something that exist independently of opinion. If you have evidence of your claim, provide it.

I feel pretty confident that you don't.

Yet again...it's not a claim. The fact was that a state of emergency was declared by the Canadian government. If you don't think it was justified - and that appears to be what you want to do, then you're first going to need to do some research on how a state of emergency is defined in Canada and under what conditions it can be declared.

As it stands now, you want to deny that something was justified without knowing anything about it. And you want me to furnish you with information that you don't appear to have so that you can make that argument.

I try not to repeat myself beyond what I consider a reasonable limit. And that limit has been reached. So now you're free to claim that I've lost an argument which I haven't proposed or that you have won one which you haven't made. Option 3 is still available in which you do some research and make an argument based on the information that you find. But my money is on option 1.

 

[Aldebaran]

No, the truckers blockade was the emergency. Now it's over, so is the need for emergency powers. The truckies are all home tucked into bed, so they've been recinded.

'TORONTO — Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau announced Wednesday he is removing emergency powers police can use after authorities ended the border blockades by those opposed to COVID-19 restrictions as well as the occupation of downtown Ottawa.

Trudeau invoked the powers last week and lawmakers affirmed the powers late Monday. Trudeau said then the powers were still needed but noted they would not stay in place a day longer than necessary.

"The situation is no longer an emergency, therefore the federal government will be ending the use of the emergencies act," Trudeau said. "We are confident that existing laws and bylaws are sufficient to keep people safe." Trudeau revokes emergency powers after Canada blockades end

Guess he got bored with being a tyranical dictator.

Or he realized that being one didn't make him popular. There's an election coming up, ya know.

 

[Bradskii]

Or he realized that being one didn't make him popular. There's an election coming up, ya know.

I'm not sure why he would be worried about it affecting his election prospects as the vast majority of Canadians (including the government opposition) supported his actions.

'Sixty-four percent agreed with the statement that "Canada's democracy is being threatened by a group of protesters and they must be stopped immediately." Sixty-four percent also supported using the Canadian military in a support role to tow protesters' trucks. ' Fact check: Strong majority of Canadians oppose convoy protests, poll after poll finds - CNNPolitics

And that figure is a lot higher than his current poll figures.

And when you have well over 90% of Canadians being vaccinated, disruptive protests against vaccinations by a small minority are not likely to garner much support.

And I think he recinded the powers because all the truckies are home in bed now. But maybe that's fake news.

 

[timothyu]

Well at least he was smart enough to back down just before a real dictator took the stage and gave the world something less frivolous to whine about.

 

[Ana the Ist]

It means I trust the process and I will make my ultimate decision based on their findings. I mean, I don't vote for Trudeau anyways....

Who runs this investigation? Do they get appointed?

Bodily autonomy? While that may have been the impetous for them leaving, it became a "richer" argument than just that and it's illogical to leave it there.

It's my understanding that their protest was against some vaccine mandates.

Am I wrong?

Regardless, quite a few companies just shifted routes so those people who wouldn't get vaxxes did national or provincial routes so it was a nonissue.

They seemed to believe it was an issue.

Frankly though, it doesn't matter if it was a non-issue....I've seen too many protests against vague problems (police violence for example) with no clear understanding of the problem or proposed solution.

I don't say those people shouldn't protest...as long as they remain peaceful and don't create an actual emergency (like surrounding a police station). I may think their protest is stupid or pointless....but they're allowed to do it and I would disagree with them being shut down.

What I am favour of is a government that is consistent in how it deals with protests. Left wing activists have seen this protest get kitglove treatment for quite a while.

Probably because it wasn't actually an emergency.

We are happy to see them treated as our activists have been treated by successive governments. It's hilarious to me that you think this is a "new" outcome. Perhaps between the two of us we could remember a time when a protest against the government was fruitful. But I can't. It is the habit of government to quash protest however they need to. When companies invaded unceded territory that First Nations controlled government squished that with some measure of violence. This has been happening in Canada since its inception.

I can't speak with any claim of expertise on Canada's history of protest.

Generally, this may be one of the first truly "right wing" protests this country has seen.

On an issue the left used to support.

Certainly the first meaningful one in a long time. So when right wingers say "Canada is disrespecting its citizens", I have to laugh at their ignorance. And then I shake my head at the fact that those same people almost ALWAYS were first to encourage police action against people THEY disagree with too. So, if the government is going to quash it, then yes, I think they need to do it for both sides of the political spectrum.

I don't disagree with you about the lack of consistency.

I watched hundreds if not thousands of people break into private property, loot it, and run. The vast majority of those people weren't even prosecuted for it....if they got arrested, they usually had the charges dropped.

The same country that chastised us for every time the police broke out the tear gas....literally rounded these people up and froze bank accounts. They didn't break into anyone's property or steal anything.

They certainly didn't burn down a police station.

I already know what my response will be next time they criticize how we handle a protest.

So these accelerationists have inflitrated both sides of the aisle but they NOT a problem with the right side of the aisle because why?
Hey, I'm totally on board with the idea that there are many people who are keen to create chaos.

Good question. I would say it's because they have between very little and no political sway on the right.

The closest thing the right has to a politician who represents the far right is Greene. She has been removed from every board, committee, and is basically ignored completely by 99% of the Republican Party. She has no real political influence.

When you compare that to the sway of AOC and the squad and far left political organizations....it's pretty clear that the extremism on the left is a bigger problem.

I'm pretty sure the "Lincoln Project" Youngkin stunt was orchestrated by one of those accelerationists. I can't prove it....but the people it hurt most was the Lincoln Project....a group of anti-Trump Republicans. It certainly fits their MO.

It's possible that because they've switched tactics they're more dangerous than before and much harder to ferret out. It was a stupid idea to go attack them in public. I much prefer my nazis out in the open and loudly broadcasting their beliefs.

So you missed the part when these accelerationists were the organizers and leaders of this protest?

Yeah...nobody has provided any evidence of that. Yourself included.

Are you going to stop pretending to be incredulous and provide the evidence?

Catagorically false. The "current data" you quote, as far as I know is the John Hopkin's study that is about as reliable a rapid antigen test and CLEARLY and certainly rigged to provide certain results. And contradicts the results of NUMEROUS other studies that show the opposite.

I haven't seen any other studies. I saw some projections based on guesswork early on. The John Hopkins study is the first I've seen using actual hard data.

But I'll admit, I was basing my opinion on the rather sterling reputation of John Hopkins in the field of medical research.

If it's a flawed study, explain why. If you have a better study, let's see it.

Again, outliers are NOT the "star" studies you want to hitch your wagon to.

No offense ....but too many people on here have been quoting simple disparities as both evidence of, and caused by, systemic racism...a term they can't define.

I'm at a point where I'm pretty sure that at least 50-70% of this forum doesn't understand....

1. Statistics
2. Disparities
3. The fact that no respectable social scientist relies upon a univariate analysis or conclusion.
4. The fact that if you don't have a null hypothesis that could possibly be investigated or proven...you aren't doing anything remotely close to science.

But like I said, I relied upon the fact that it came from John Hopkins.

If I'm wrong just show me how the study is wrong....I'll admit it.

To be clear, I'm not arguing what happenned was perfect and should NOT be different. I'm also not saying they were "worth" it Because I'm not personally ready to put a set number of lives I'm willing to lose. COVID already was the single most deadly ANYTHING to happen in America by orders of magnitude I believe right?

I don't know? Am I supposed to compare this to everything?

I AM arguing that they WORKED.

Not according to John Hopkins. Given the political climate, it seems like they would have gone over the study with a fine toothed comb.

In regards to future pandemics, I would advocate that we don't take either side of the political aisle here in North America but instead turn to Asian countries with track records of success to see what they did to manage that and emulate it.

Geography has a big influence here.

Peninsular and island nations always have an advantage in restricting people from entering.

We have a border that only gets some consideration when one side is in office. Biden let in 2 million people last year....and they went everywhere.

Even if we had locked everything down....why wouldn't 2 million foreigners wandering the nation be a problem? Are they magically immune to covid like BLM protesters?

 

[bekkilyn]

Yep! In fact, it seems like there's a "state of emergency" being declared pretty much everywhere and all the time. But it took a Russian military invasion for Ukraine to declare one, while it only took working class Canadian truckers camping out for it to happen in Canada.

I can't remember offhand who it was, but I was watching someone yesterday who was talking about people on the left and how they were always claiming how they were for the working class and chanting about 'workers of the world unite'.

And now when they finally DID unite, the same leftists are suddenly yelling, "No! No! Stop uniting! Stop uniting!"

That was probably the funniest thing I watched all day. I'm even still laughing about it now that I'm thinking of it again.

It's just weird how you can point out so many things that have characterized Trudeau's behavior and his actions against his own citizens and the leftists don't see it. I'm reminded of that old Tweety and Sylvester cartoon in which Sylvester kept seeing Tweety Bird as a cooked and dressed bird because he loved eating birds and was seeing Tweety as he wanted to see him. It seems that people on the left are seeing Nazis and white supremacists and racists everywhere, but it's not the reality at all. I look at the very same crowds and I see people of multiple races, immigrants from various nationalities, indigenous people. The old woman who was trampled by the horse was from the Mohawk tribe and she was out there right beforehand talking about how they were peaceful.

And yet all that people on the left can see is Nazis. I don't get it unless they are just filling themselves to the brim with government media propaganda that does nothing but lie to people. People who have actually gone down to the streets and interacted with the protesters end up with a whole different experience than is claimed through the lies of government-owned media.

When I think of "state of emergency" declarations, either a major weather event has torn up an area or there is an invasion like Russia invading Ukraine. You don't declare states of emergency against your own people simply because you refuse to talk to them because they disagree with you about something.

Truly, what kind of leader does that? If Huffington Post (a very left-oriented organization) saw this coming, then it says something right there. This really isn't a right-left thing, but more of government-elite vs. the people thing.

 

[timothyu]

On an issue the left used to support.

Isn't it interesting how the old right seems to have disappeared, the left of the 60's is now the right and who knows what the new left is other than resembling cable news and the me movement.

 

[rambot]

I can't remember offhand who it was, but I was watching someone yesterday who was talking about people on the left and how they were always claiming how they were for the working class and chanting about 'workers of the world unite'.

And now when they finally DID unite, the same leftists are suddenly yelling, "No! No! Stop uniting! Stop uniting!"

That was probably the funniest thing I watched all day. I'm even still laughing about it now that I'm thinking of it again.

It's just weird how you can point out so many things that have characterized Trudeau's behavior and his actions against his own citizens and the leftists don't see it. I'm reminded of that old Tweety and Sylvester cartoon in which Sylvester kept seeing Tweety Bird as a cooked and dressed bird because he loved eating birds and was seeing Tweety as he wanted to see him. It seems that people on the left are seeing Nazis and white supremacists and racists everywhere, but it's not the reality at all. I look at the very same crowds and I see people of multiple races, immigrants from various nationalities, indigenous people. The old woman who was trampled by the horse was from the Mohawk tribe and she was out there right beforehand talking about how they were peaceful.

And yet all that people on the left can see is Nazis. I don't get it unless they are just filling themselves to the brim with government media propaganda that does nothing but lie to people. People who have actually gone down to the streets and interacted with the protesters end up with a whole different experience than is claimed through the lies of government-owned media.

When I think of "state of emergency" declarations, either a major weather event has torn up an area or there is an invasion like Russia invading Ukraine. You don't declare states of emergency against your own people simply because you refuse to talk to them because they disagree with you about something.

Truly, what kind of leader does that? If Huffington Post (a very left-oriented organization) saw this coming, then it says something right there. This really isn't a right-left thing, but more of government-elite vs. the people thing.

That wasn't workers of the world

It was 10% of the workforce.

 

[Bradskii]

I haven't seen any other studies. I saw some projections based on guesswork early on. The John Hopkins study is the first I've seen using actual hard data.

But I'll admit, I was basing my opinion on the rather sterling reputation of John Hopkins in the field of medical research.

If it's a flawed study, explain why. If you have a better study, let's see it.

You should have dug deeper.

First up, it wasn't a study either commissioned or endorsed by John Hopkins.
Secondly, only one of the authors works at JH.
Thirdly, he and the other two authors are not medical experts but economic ones.
Fourthly, it's not a peer reviewed study. It's a self described 'working paper'.
Fifth, their definition of a lockdown was one where there was "the imposition of at least one compulsory, non-pharmaceutical intervention (NPI).” Which could include the requirement to wear a mask.
Sixth, their 'meta analysis' only looked at 34 papers, 12 of which were non peer reviewed working papers and only one was by an epidemiologist.

There are more details of the problems here (although I'd have no idea why you'd want any more): Did So-Called ‘Johns Hopkins Study’ Really Show Lockdowns Were Ineffective Against Covid-19?

 

[Aldebaran]

That wasn't workers of the world

It was 10% of the workforce.

So all 100% of them have to be in total agreement in order to unite?
You may be surprised to learn that the total number of employees in the U.S. who are in unions is around 10%.

"In 2021, the number of wage and salary workers belonging to unions continued to decline (-241,000) to 14.0 million, and the percent who were members of unions—the union membership rate—was 10.3 percent, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. The rate is down from 10.8 percent in 2020—when the rate increased due to a disproportionately large decline in the total number of nonunion workers compared with the decline in the number of union members. The 2021 unionization rate is the same as the 2019 rate of 10.3 percent. In 1983, the first year for which comparable union data are available, the union membership rate was 20.1 percent and there were 17.7 million union workers."
https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/union2.pdf

 

[rambot]

So all 100% of them have to be in total agreement in order to unite?
You may be surprised to learn that the total number of employees in the U.S. who are in unions is around 10%.

"In 2021, the number of wage and salary workers belonging to unions continued to decline (-241,000) to 14.0 million, and the percent who were members of unions—the union membership rate—was 10.3 percent, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. The rate is down from 10.8 percent in 2020—when the rate increased due to a disproportionately large decline in the total number of nonunion workers compared with the decline in the number of union members. The 2021 unionization rate is the same as the 2019 rate of 10.3 percent. In 1983, the first year for which comparable union data are available, the union membership rate was 20.1 percent and there were 17.7 million union workers."
https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/union2.pdf

Depending on how you define unite. 90% of workers United to get the vaccine so 10% does not seem impressive.

As for union rep in the states, I know. It's a great reason vast amounts of Americans are financially suffering. Once upon a time unions protected living wages and guess what, they still do.
Nonunion workers had weekly earnings 81 percent of union members in 2019 : The Economics Daily : U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics

Also, and let's really consider this..

. The results obtained from nearly 4,000 respondents show that 48 percent – nearly half of nonunionized workers – would join a union if given the opportunity to do so.

A growing number of Americans want to join a union

So let's not pretend that unions are undesirable by workers.

Unions are undesirable by people who would not be able to afford that 7th house in Nantucket and the politicians that they finance.

Do not hold onto the idea that unions are unpopular

 

[bekkilyn]

Depending on how you define unite. 90% of workers United to get the vaccine so 10% does not seem impressive.

As for union rep in the states, I know. It's a great reason vast amounts of Americans are financially suffering. Once upon a time unions protected living wages and guess what, they still do.
Nonunion workers had weekly earnings 81 percent of union members in 2019 : The Economics Daily : U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics

So you're only assuming 10% based on a very false assumption that the only people out there protesting were unvaccinated. I had wondered where you got that 10% from and it seems that it was made up (probably by government media) and not based on actual evidence.