View Poll Results: Last two years beginning of a downward slide for Public Sector Unions?

Voters
73. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes, their power has waxed and now it shall wane.

    44 60.27%
  • Unions will respond and their power will grow.

    14 19.18%
  • It depends on November.

    15 20.55%
Page 116 of 124 FirstFirst ... 1666106114115116117118 ... LastLast
Results 1,151 to 1,160 of 1237

Thread: Beginning of the End for Public Unions?

  1. #1151
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:40 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,148

    Re: Beginning of the End for Public Unions?

    Quote Originally Posted by Catawba View Post
    Your not knowing any of this explains a lot.

    Senate GOP blocks bill that would promote less outsourcing
    You describing this as "ending a tax break for outsourcing" explains a lot, too.

    from your article:

    ...The latest jobs bill from Senate Democrats - a plan to punish firms that ship jobs overseas - failed to clear a key procedural hurdle Tuesday after even some Democrats complained that the measure would hamper the ability of U.S. companies to compete in foreign markets... Four Democrats and Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman (I-Conn.) voted with a united Republican caucus to block the bill...
    Has there ever been a political party more dedicated to the notion that the secret to getting all those gold eggs is killing the goose?

  2. #1152
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:42 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    90,076

    Re: Beginning of the End for Public Unions?

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    Take a look at businesses moving from Union to RTW states and ask yourself "why".
    Okay. Lets do just that.

    ‘Right to work’: The wrong answer for Michigan’s economy | Economic Policy Institute

    A Brookings Institution study of large corporations’ location decisions, based in part on interviews with prominent corporate location consultants, found that right-to-work laws did not figure anywhere in the typical decision process of big businesses (Cohen 2000). Even small manufacturers—those thought most likely to base location decisions on low wages and the absence of unions—don’t identify right to work as an important criterion in deciding where to locate plants. Area Development magazine conducts an annual survey, asking primarily small manufacturers to rank the factors that most influence their decisions about where to locate facilities. In 2009, right to work was ranked 14th in importance, below such factors as highway accessibility, available land, and construction costs. Indeed, in the years for which Area Development reports data, right-to-work has never made it into the top 10 most important factors shaping location decisions (Gambale 2009, 2008).

    In fact, Site Selection magazine reports that the best locations for the type of high-tech industries that are now a priority of most states’ recruitment efforts are predominantly found in free-bargaining states (Burns 2011). The Information Technology and Innovation Foundation’s 2010 State New Economy Index—measuring each state’s economic dynamism, technological innovation, digital transformation, knowledge jobs, and integration into global trade—ranked free-bargaining Massachuse s, Washington, Maryland, New Jersey, and Connecticut as the most desirable and best positioned locations for the globally competitive industries of the 21st century. Indeed, nine of the top 10 ranked states are free-bargaining states—states with strong education systems, world-class universities, robust digital infrastructure, and a skilled and stable workforce. Michigan ranked 17th, ahead of all but two of the 22 right-to-work states (Atkinson and Andes 2010).
    So now that issue has been settled with a whole lot more than just pompous pontifications and ideologically fueled speculation,
    __________________________________________________ _
    There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.... John Rogers

  3. #1153
    Sage
    MoSurveyor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Last Seen
    04-13-17 @ 04:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    9,985

    Re: Beginning of the End for Public Unions?

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    It decreases.
    Funny that decreased demand is an argument to kill unions but it's nowhere to be seen when discussing increasing taxes on the middle class and lower income workers.
    Mt. Rushmore: Three surveyors and some other guy.
    Life goes on within you and without you. -Harrison
    Hear the echoes of the centuries, Power isn't all that money buys. -Peart
    After you learn quantum mechanics you're never really the same again. -Weinberg

  4. #1154
    Professor
    Sig's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Last Seen
    11-29-13 @ 11:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    2,179

    Re: Beginning of the End for Public Unions?

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post

    no, but there is a point at which it is no longer worth the cost to have a teacher for every 15 students vice a teacher for every 25. That point comes long after you realize that it is no longer worth the cost to have nearly as many administrators as teachers.
    Do you mean to say that if the upper class nabobs were to lower the prices they charge middle class teachers for everything from housing, to utilities, to healthcare, to food, that it would make high quality education more affordable since the teachers would not need to be paid as well in order to maintain a middle class standard of living?

    And sometimes they won't get it, either. That, after all, is the purpose of the N.I.C.E. and the Independent Panel Advisory Board; to decide when you are no longer "cost effective". Raise the cost of plastic surgery by 100,000,00% and see
    But what do you do when the cost of housing, utilities, healthcare, and food is maximized by monolithic multinational corporations, who own the means of production for all of these essentials (in spite of anti-trust laws) for no other reason than to maximize profits?

    But you are trying to make this about very specific services, when the subject was broad unionization. Take a look at businesses moving from Union to RTW states and ask yourself "why". It's not because they're evil. It's because they want to succeed, and a unionized workforce makes that harder.
    What is evil is nonsense anti-union propaganda orchestrated to scare union workers into thinking RTW policy bears any weight whatsoever in where a business sets up shop.

    RTW laws are bunk.

    Why?

    Because any worker with any degree of intelligence or sense of self-preservation will voluntarily join the union because it serves his interests to do so. Having a union is always better than not having one, at least for the worker that is.

    It decreases.
    Here's an idea:

    In order to contain salary costs, instead of attacking the teacher's union and other middle class union workers, try attacking the upper class real estate developers who set the cost of housing for middle class union workers according to their salary increases, artificially raising the cost of living for the middle class worker after every wage increase his union negotiates, and for no other reason than unabashed corporate greed.
    Last edited by Sig; 06-17-12 at 12:09 PM.
    It's like you're dreaming of Gorgonzola when it's clearly Brie time, baby. Step into my office.

  5. #1155
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    Re: Beginning of the End for Public Unions?

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    no, but there is a point at which it is no longer worth the cost to have a teacher for every 15 students vice a teacher for every 25. That point comes long after you realize that it is no longer worth the cost to have nearly as many administrators as teachers.
    Class size has only a minor connection to demand. Class size is related to how many students can you manage and still be effective. This is largely variable. Depending on subject matter and class make up, the number can be different.



    And sometimes they won't get it, either. That, after all, is the purpose of the N.I.C.E. and the Independent Panel Advisory Board; to decide when you are no longer "cost effective". Raise the cost of plastic surgery by 100,000,00% and see


    But you are trying to make this about very specific services, when the subject was broad unionization. Take a look at businesses moving from Union to RTW states and ask yourself "why".

    It's not because they're evil. It's because they want to succeed, and a unionized workforce makes that harder.
    No, that is actually not what N.I.C.E. is for. What is NEEDED is different than what is WANTED. But the board is to review what practices work, using actual scientific data as the critieria. The ill person, not the I prefer a small noase people, have a need no matter what the suplly is.

    As for unions, it really has nothing to do with supply and demand. Need will be there either way. And where there is a need, someone will supply it, if only for those who can afford it.


    It decreases.
    Not a single bit. Kids will still need to be educated and the ill will still need to be treated. The demand remains the same.

    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

  6. #1156
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:40 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,148

    Re: Beginning of the End for Public Unions?

    Quote Originally Posted by MoSurveyor View Post
    Funny that decreased demand is an argument to kill unions but it's nowhere to be seen when discussing increasing taxes on the middle class and lower income workers.
    Who said we should kill unions? I merely agree with FDR that the public sector is not a place for collective bargaining, and with Madison that faction must balance faction in the private sector.

    However, you are conflating (as I understand it) two entirely different things.

  7. #1157
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:40 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,148

    Re: Beginning of the End for Public Unions?

    Quote Originally Posted by Sig View Post
    Do you mean to say that if the upper class nabobs were to lower the prices they charge middle class teachers for everything from housing, to utilities, to healthcare, to food, that it would make high quality education more affordable since the teachers would not need to be paid as well in order to maintain a middle class standard of living?
    Well hell. If we were to confiscate all of their property and put it in states education funds, it would ease state budgets as well. We could do even better if we were to have an overnight movement to steal (say) everything owned by Asians for the Needs Of The State.

    What you are speaking of is built upon a false assumption that the owners of stock can control prices. Supply and Demand (generally) set prices - the government can shift them higher (as can increases in the cost of production), but to put on an artificial price ceiling (as you suggest) is to create an artificial shortage.

    But what do you do when the cost of housing, utilities, healthcare, and food is maximized by monolithic multinational corporations, who own the means of production for all of these essentials (in spite of anti-trust laws) for no other reason than to maximize profits?
    I purchase from their competitors who sell at lower prices.

    which will produce this effect:

    The funny thing being - that chart is actually still reflecting an artificially high price, given that government keeps the price of food artificially high.

    What is evil is nonsense anti-union propaganda orchestrated to scare union workers into thinking RTW policy bears any weight whatsoever in where a business sets up shop.
    That is incorrect, and is demonstrated little better by the fact that Right to Work states have enjoyed nearly double the job growth of the union states since 1977. Lots of major businesses won't even consider setting up in Union states because they don't want the higher costs and higher hassles of dealing with a hostile workforce. Haymarket cited "small manufacturers" for a reason - because those have the least ability to cross state lines.

    Because any worker with any degree of intelligence or sense of self-preservation will voluntarily join the union because it serves his interests to do so. Having a union is always better than not having one, at least for the worker that is.
    apparently union members disagree. You will notice that the private sector union membership has been on decline for over half a century now, and public sector union membership drops dramatically as soon as its' members are given the option.

    In order to contain salary costs, instead of attacking the teacher's union and other middle class union workers, try attacking the upper class real estate developers who set the cost of housing for middle class union workers according to their salary increases, artificially raising the cost of living for the middle class worker after every wage increase his union negotiates, and for no other reason than unabashed corporate greed.
    No one "sets" the price of housing. Housing skyrocketed because demand did, because alot of factors (government and private side) made it easier to borrow money for that purpose, which A) effectively lowering it's cost-on-impact, and B) encouraging people to see house-flipping as a means of trustworthy income.

    Besides which, your proposal works at cross purposes to itself. Sticky wages in a deflationary environment increase in value.

  8. #1158
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:40 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,148

    Re: Beginning of the End for Public Unions?

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    Class size has only a minor connection to demand. Class size is related to how many students can you manage and still be effective.
    It should be - unfortunately not so much. If teachers existed in a sector where individual bargaining and set-ups like that were possible, then it would be more likely to do so. Unfortunately, teachers are overwhelmingly unionized, and so those kinds of things (merit pay for the ability to manage larger classrooms, for example) are impossible.

    But you are incorrect that it has no connection to demand. The supply of teachers demanded by a school district will be directly connected to their ability to afford them, which in turn will stem directly from their per-unit cost.


    No, that is actually not what N.I.C.E. is for.
    actually it is.

    ...Cost Effectiveness

    ...As with any system financing health care, the NHS has a limited budget and a vast number of potential spending options. Choices must be made as to how this limited budget is spent. By comparing the cost effectiveness in terms of health quality gained for the money spent.[14] By choosing to spend the finite NHS budget upon those treatment options that provide the most efficient results, society can ensure it does not lose out on possible health gains through spending on inefficient treatments and neglecting those that are more efficient.

    NICE attempts to assess the cost-effectiveness of potential expenditures within the NHS to assess whether or not they represent 'better value' for money than treatments that would be neglected if the expenditure took place. It assesses the cost effectiveness of new treatments by analysing the cost and benefit of the proposed treatment relative to the next best treatment that is currently in use.[15]

    Quality Adjusted Life Years

    NICE utililises the quality-adjusted life year (QALY) to measure the health benefits delivered by a given treatment regime. By comparing the present value (see discounting) of expected QALY flows with and without treatment, or relative to another treatment, the net/relative health benefit derived from such a treatment can be derived. When combined with the relative cost of treatment this information can be used to form an Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratio (ICER) to allow comparison of suggested expenditure against current resource use at the margin (the cost effectiveness threshold).[14]

    As a guideline rule, NICE accepts as cost effective those interventions with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of less than 20,000 per QALY and that there should be increasingly strong reasons for accepting as cost effective interventions with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of over a threshold of 30,000 per QALY.[16]..
    You know how you and others talk about the reduced costs of single-payer? Government rationing, baby

    As for unions, it really has nothing to do with supply and demand. Need will be there either way. And where there is a need, someone will supply it, if only for those who can afford it.
    At higher prices, demand is decreased. Unions (so Haymarket brags) raise the price of labor, thus decreasing demand for it.

    Try to get yourself hired as a tutor insisting upon $100,000 per hour, and see how much "need" there is for you.

  9. #1159
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    Re: Beginning of the End for Public Unions?

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    It should be - unfortunately not so much. If teachers existed in a sector where individual bargaining and set-ups like that were possible, then it would be more likely to do so. Unfortunately, teachers are overwhelmingly unionized, and so those kinds of things (merit pay for the ability to manage larger classrooms, for example) are impossible.

    But you are incorrect that it has no connection to demand. The supply of teachers demanded by a school district will be directly connected to their ability to afford them, which in turn will stem directly from their per-unit cost.
    As most here do not belong to a union (though teachers in schools with a union do better), I would love to see natioanl numbers. I may look for that later. But, you arw also wrong. The factors for class size is often the subject matter and how the size we can best handle. Schools are always raising the number, but this is rarely in the best interest of the student.



    actually it is.



    You know how you and others talk about the reduced costs of single-payer? Government rationing, baby
    I do wish you would read for comprehension. Really, you post a lot of things you don't read in its entirity. What you qoute emans is exactly what I said, what works gets preference over what doesn't. That's not rationing, and no intelligent person would think it was.

    And you should read the rest of your link as well.

    At higher prices, demand is decreased. Unions (so Haymarket brags) raise the price of labor, thus decreasing demand for it.

    Try to get yourself hired as a tutor insisting upon $100,000 per hour, and see how much "need" there is for you.
    No, not in education and medicine. What decreases is who and how many will have their need met. That student will still need the tutor, they just won't get one. But the need will still be there. Too often your solutions are to make sure the need is not met, and then say there wasn't a need. That's more than flawed logic, it's a bit of slight of hand. The need is really still there.

    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

  10. #1160
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    Re: Beginning of the End for Public Unions?

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    It should be - unfortunately not so much. If teachers existed in a sector where individual bargaining and set-ups like that were possible, then it would be more likely to do so. Unfortunately, teachers are overwhelmingly unionized, and so those kinds of things (merit pay for the ability to manage larger classrooms, for example) are impossible.
    Only five states do not allow collective bargaining for educators, effectively banning teachers unions. Those states and their SAT/ACT rankings are as follows:

    South Carolina – 50th

    North Carolina – 49th

    Georgia – 48th

    Texas – 47th

    Virginia – 44th

    Meanwhile ground zero of the union battle, Wisconsin, is ranked 2nd in the country.

    Read more: The Five States Where Teachers Unions Are Illegal Have The Lowest Test Scores In America* - Business Insider

    I'm still trying to find national numbers CP, but here are states that don't even have a union. Are they overwhelmingly unionized?

    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

Posting Permissions

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