Page 25 of 96 FirstFirst ... 1523242526273575 ... LastLast
Results 241 to 250 of 955

Thread: Unions threaten Business

  1. #241
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:30 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,077

    Re: Unions threaten Business

    Quote Originally Posted by randel View Post
    union shops bring up the wages of non-union shops that do similar work in their area, that is a benefit to those in non-union shops, and as a whole, thanks to unions, benefits are better for everyone.
    it is certainly true that employees in similar industries can use the threat of unionization to get higher wages. however, since each worker now costs more, the employer will now hire fewer of them; which immediately reduces employment. and since he is now pouring more resources into employee compensation, he has fewer resources to spend on other investments, which means that the other industries with which he trades will suffer as demand is reduced, and their wages and employment will suffer accordingly.

    good for those who are already in. bad for everyone else. that's just the facts for when you artificially hike up the price for a good or service.

    i know many here , the hardcore 'conservatives' are happy with the way wisconsin turned out, but rest assured, that battle isnt over by a longshot...why are those hardcore 'conservatives' happy with what happened? because they see it as a crippling blow to the democrats, that will hurt them financially come the next election.
    given our pro-government-cuts position, yes, we view the reduction of the ability of the Government Party to launder itself taxpayer money via the public unions to be a benefit, yes.

    if these 'conservatives' were honest in public, they would admit that what walker did was union busting, and had very precious little to do with 'balancing the budget' as walker claimed
    actually the two are one and the same. you might as well claim that republicans support entitlement reform not to avoid bankruptcy, but because they hate old people.

    seriously, you are smarter than alan greyson; don't resort to his reasoning.

  2. #242
    Disappointed Evolutionist
    Catawba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    05-28-13 @ 08:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    27,254

    Re: Unions threaten Business

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    i think you are thinking of the 1920's. that's when we saw the birth of the middle class. union membership growing and peaking has actually been typically associated with lower growth and higher unemployment, which harm the middle class. the corporatist National Industrial Recovery Act, for example, held wages and prices at 25% above their market levels, resulting in high unemployment and collapsed standards of living.



    glad to help

    Thanks for your opinion!




    According to statistics the period of least income inequality (strongest middle class) was from 1944 to 1980.
    Treat the earth well: it was not given to you by your parents, it was loaned to you by your children. We do not inherit the Earth from our Ancestors, we borrow it from our Children. ~ Ancient American Indian Proverb

  3. #243
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:30 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,077

    Re: Unions threaten Business

    Quote Originally Posted by randel View Post
    the governor overstepped by a country mile...simple union busting is all this was.
    i'm still waiting to hear how a measure that brings Wisconsin closer to America's center on this issue is "extreme right wing".

  4. #244
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:30 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,077

    Re: Unions threaten Business

    Quote Originally Posted by Catawba View Post
    According to statistics the period of least income inequality (strongest middle class) was from 1944 to 1980.
    what in the world makes you think that low income inequality = a stronger middle class?

  5. #245
    Sage
    Lord Tammerlain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:39 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    10,431

    Re: Unions threaten Business

    Quote Originally Posted by Temporal View Post
    This is specious reasoning, as it's not about wealth, but quality control. Jobs are a privilege, not a right. If people aren't performing they should be fired or at least held back. Unions are making it so that people can coast through the seniority ladder with no merit to justify it, and at the same time get increasingly higher salaries.

    The union battles right now are about state budgets vs. union employees, so it's about money in this case, but the battle has been brewing for a while. They want to have their cake and eat it too and that's just not the way the economy works sometimes.
    Jobs are not a right of course

    The ability to sell your goods or services is. If you choose to combine the selling of your labour along with other people within the same employer you should be able to. If you and your associated decide to hold out on providing your service to the company it is their right. If you and your associates make a contract with the employer that they will only use the services provided by you or your associates that is a right

    Having the government mandate that Dell has to use Intell chips along with AMD computer chips is a violation of Intel and of Dells rights to form contracts. If at the end of said contract the buyer of said goods or services does not want to purchase those goods or services (in this case labour) by all means dont buy those services.

    Overall in a capitalist system everyone wants to have their cake and eat it too. Greed is good, is it not. What I object to is the method of trying to limit the union. If the gov of wisconsin tried just to actually drive a hard bargin and lower compensation I would be fine with that. He took a cowards way out because he does not have the stomach to lock out the union as a means to drive down compensation costs
    Happy Hanukkah Cheerfull Kwanzaa
    Happy Christmas Merry New Year Festivus for the rest of us

  6. #246
    Anti Fascist Alt L Ctrl C
    William Rea's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    UK
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 05:50 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    8,490

    Re: Unions threaten Business

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Tammerlain View Post
    Jobs are not a right of course

    The ability to sell your goods or services is. If you choose to combine the selling of your labour along with other people within the same employer you should be able to. If you and your associated decide to hold out on providing your service to the company it is their right. If you and your associates make a contract with the employer that they will only use the services provided by you or your associates that is a right

    Having the government mandate that Dell has to use Intell chips along with AMD computer chips is a violation of Intel and of Dells rights to form contracts. If at the end of said contract the buyer of said goods or services does not want to purchase those goods or services (in this case labour) by all means dont buy those services.

    Overall in a capitalist system everyone wants to have their cake and eat it too. Greed is good, is it not. What I object to is the method of trying to limit the union. If the gov of wisconsin tried just to actually drive a hard bargin and lower compensation I would be fine with that. He took a cowards way out because he does not have the stomach to lock out the union as a means to drive down compensation costs
    There is nothing that Capitalists like more than a free market rigged in their favour.

  7. #247
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    01-18-13 @ 07:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    1,631

    Re: Unions threaten Business

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Tammerlain View Post
    You are complaining about how much a certain group of people are making over what typical people earn. When people did this against the bankers and other highly paid executives it was called socialism. You want them to make what everyone else is making (spread the wealth baby) which sounds darn socialist

    What about corporations ability to corrupt politicians, they typically have far more money to buy off politicians then unions
    Socialism is an act of theft. If people are abusing the power of government to unconstitutionally limit the salaries and compensations earned by others, then they're accomplices in that theft.

    The problem with your argument is that bankers aren't employed by the government.

    Public workers are employed by people who, by some strange magic, earn the median wage. The government employees aren't doing anything special, in most cases they're mediocre performers. No reason why, just because they managed to extort closed shops and kick back millions of dollars to the politicians who are supposed to be representing the people's interests, not the unions, they should be thought of as "deserving" those extorted higher wages.

    There's no reason whatsoever a government employee should be getting paid statistically more than the serfs laboring away to pay the taxes to fund the union member's paycheck, pension, and perks.


    The defining phrase can be found from the mouth of an old, old Republican.

    The government is "by the people, of the people, and for the people".

    Not "for the unions".

  8. #248
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    01-18-13 @ 07:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    1,631

    Re: Unions threaten Business

    Quote Originally Posted by Temporal View Post
    We need to be careful to not have an unbalanced approach to unions. Their existence is needed, but their existence needs proper reforms.

    There is no point in striving to be the world's #1 economy if our people are living in squallor and can't make ends meet. Unions ensure that work environments are safe and that wages are competitive. Where they fall short is in blocking desperately needed reforms to businesses and the public sector.

    A new balance is needed between employers, unions, and government. The status quo isn't working anymore. Unions have used their power to maximize personal gain, often for no rational reason other than making more money.
    Utter nonsense.

    The median wage of any state in the union is sufficient to keep a man out of "squalor". He'll have his car, he'll have his house. He'll have his hot and cold running water in both his bathrooms. He'll have his pension building, he'll have his health care, he'll even have vacation days and sufficient money left over to go to Hawaii once in a while.

    He can live like EVERY OTHER AVERAGE AMERICAN. That's what the word "median" means.

  9. #249
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    01-18-13 @ 07:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    1,631

    Re: Unions threaten Business

    Quote Originally Posted by Catawba View Post
    Thanks for your opinion!




    According to statistics the period of least income inequality (strongest middle class) was from 1944 to 1980.

    Interesting.

    It wasn't a gap that gave us the Depressoin, it was the Federal Reserve. That's a pretty big graphic you posted to say something that isn't true.

  10. #250
    Sage
    Lord Tammerlain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:39 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    10,431

    Re: Unions threaten Business

    Quote Originally Posted by Mayor Snorkum View Post
    Socialism is an act of theft. If people are abusing the power of government to unconstitutionally limit the salaries and compensations earned by others, then they're accomplices in that theft.

    The problem with your argument is that bankers aren't employed by the government.
    Doesnt matter who is the employer
    Public workers are employed by people who, by some strange magic, earn the median wage. The government employees aren't doing anything special, in most cases they're mediocre performers. No reason why, just because they managed to extort closed shops and kick back millions of dollars to the politicians who are supposed to be representing the people's interests, not the unions, they should be thought of as "deserving" those extorted higher wages.
    And this is where the socialism comes in. People in free markets are not paid what they are worth, they are paid what they can get for their services (excluding min wage laws of course). Next thing you will want sports athletes to have their salaries limited and those of upper management

    There's no reason whatsoever a government employee should be getting paid statistically more than the serfs laboring away to pay the taxes to fund the union member's paycheck, pension, and perks.
    They should get what ever they can negotiate for from the employer. Paying what they are worth is darn similar to paying what they need (communism)
    The defining phrase can be found from the mouth of an old, old Republican.

    The government is "by the people, of the people, and for the people".

    Not "for the unions".
    From each according to their ability to each according to their need

    You are against the free market of selling ones labour, and using means to ensure that one gets the highest compensation one can get. That is not capitalism but communism. Wage controls come next right, for those nurses who you feel are over paid, then the engineers
    Happy Hanukkah Cheerfull Kwanzaa
    Happy Christmas Merry New Year Festivus for the rest of us

Page 25 of 96 FirstFirst ... 1523242526273575 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •