View Poll Results: How many here belong to a union?

Voters
82. You may not vote on this poll
  • I have worked my whole career while in a union

    9 10.98%
  • I belong to one currently

    15 18.29%
  • I have never and would never join one

    34 41.46%
  • I used to be in one but not now

    24 29.27%
Page 65 of 78 FirstFirst ... 1555636465666775 ... LastLast
Results 641 to 650 of 773

Thread: How many here belong a union in the public or private sector? Why? or Why not?

  1. #641
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:20 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,105

    Re: How many here belong a union in the public or private sector? Why? or Why not?

    Quote Originally Posted by ChrisL View Post
    That's not the case in the construction industry. Don't get me wrong, I don't think unions are necessary in EVERY line of work, but I also KNOW that not all unions are "bad" like some people try to make them out to be. Are they perfect? Of course not, but a some of them are very good to their employees and do care.

    For people to say that all unions are bad and unnecessary is rather short-sighted IMO.
    I don't think anyone has made that argument. What most of us are saying is that the model lends itself to abuse, is generally built around coercion, and has destructive economic effects.

  2. #642
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:01 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    89,792

    Re: How many here belong a union in the public or private sector? Why? or Why not?

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    I don't think anyone has made that argument. What most of us are saying is that the model lends itself to abuse, is generally built around coercion, and has destructive economic effects.
    Actually the union model is based around the old Aesop's Fable of the man teaching his son about the strength of a bundle of sticks.


    13. THE BUNDLE OF STICKS

    A certain Father had a family of Sons, who were forever quarreling among themselves. No words he could say did the least good, so he cast about in his mind for some very striking example that should make them see that discord would lead them to misfortune.

    One day when the quarreling had been much more violent than usual and each of the Sons was moping in a surly manner, he asked one of them to bring him a bundle of sticks. Then handing the bundle to each of his Sons in turn he told them to try to break it. But although each one tried his best, none was able to do so.

    The Father then untied the bundle and gave the sticks to his Sons to break one by one. This they did very easily.

    "My Sons," said the Father, "do you not see how certain it is that if you agree with each other and help each other, it will be impossible for your enemies to injure you? But if you are divided among yourselves, you will be no stronger than a single stick in that bundle."

    In unity is strength.



    I see nothing in your post to support any claim about destructive economic effects.
    __________________________________________________ _
    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. #643
    Sage
    MoSurveyor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Last Seen
    04-13-17 @ 04:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    9,985

    Re: How many here belong a union in the public or private sector? Why? or Why not?

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    I like how you answer with moral outrage, but fail to answer the point. Labor does exist on a Supply/Demand curve and policies that ignore that truth will fail and the result will be harm to workers.
    I'm sorry you thinks it's "moral outrage". It was nothing more than a statement of the facts without the pleasant labels. If you believe it's moral outrage then maybe you should rethink your position on the subject.

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    But hey, feel free to come explain your position on the thread devoted to just this exact topic. You will note that so far the vote is 26-1 against your position.
    Did you bother to put your question into these terms, which is a quote from the post you just quoted here?
    "A) Only from a business perspective does labor obey supply/demand. From a societal standpoint it can't - unless you're willing to let people die from poverty."

    If not then your search for popular approval is as empty and dishonest as a politician's.


    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    you can call it whatever you like, the fact remains that we do shift labor around between multiple uses, and occasionally it isn't employed.
    And when it's not employed it falls on society to support the "machinery" - not the business community.



    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    On the contrary, we don't need to do any of these things, nor are they doomed. Labor is wonderful because we as people are not insects - we can learn new trades, do new things. Entire industries can get thrown out of work through advancement in the economy and be reabsorbed so long as we don't muck up the process of that reallocation through misguided efforts built on silly notions like "labor is not effected by supply and demand". The Horse and Buggy industry was pretty much destroyed by the automobile, and yet we didn't see a generation of unemployed leatherworkers, farriers, and carriage-builders; they went to work elsewhere, doing other things.
    You haven't shown any other option besides those given. If you're suggesting there will ever be 100% employment you're living in Dream Land.



    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    On the contrary, the majority of the people is what controls the market. Which, after all, is really just a handy term for "the aggregate economic decisions of all people".
    Which is not the same thing as conscious control (assuming you believe in free will). I know you can't seem to grasp this concept, though, since you hate collective bargaining - which is another example of conscious control instead of aggregate decision.



    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    How silly. No we aren't. Firstly, there is no such thing as a single entity known as "business". There are individual businesses, who compete among each other over people. Secondly, people are not tied by law to the particular businesses at which they work or from whom they purchase. If McDonalds decides to change the recipe in the Secret Sauce, I am free to start going to Burger King. If my employer does not pay me what my labor is worth, then I am free to go work for a competitor. Businesses spend a lot of time and money trying to figure out what we want because they are subject to our whims (if they want to survive), not the other way 'round.
    Burger King is going to pay you the same poor wages for flipping burgers as McD's does. "Going to a competitor" doesn't change the reality of the situation for the workers when businesses pay the same wages for the same job.

    Burger Flipper 1 - $7.25/hr
    fry cook 1 - $8/hr
    fry cook 2 - $8.25/hr



    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    On the contrary, as discussed, people are not cogs that can only fit at certain points in certain machines.
    Never said they were. Again we butt up against your intentional misinterpretation.

    However, to use your analogy, machines require certain cogs in certain places for the machine function. The cost of those cogs doesn't change just because the machine has a different owner.



    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    Well, I, for example, will probably be doubling my pay in the next year and a half, because I will be leaving one employer to work for another. From there I expect to leave that employer for a later increase in compensation, and so on and so forth. How many workers? Most of them. In fact, the vast majority of them. We tend to only spend about 3-4 years at a job, and the older you get, the more money you tend to make. Ergo, when we change jobs, we are usually changing it for higher pay.

    http://www.advisorperspectives.com/d...eal-growth.gif
    Congratulations! You actually found someone to pay you twice as much for doing the same job you're doing now!


    Too bad they used income instead of pay. This does nothing to advance your case. A 50-yr-old janitor makes the same money mopping floors at McD's as the 16-yr-old teen.



    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    Heck fully 33% of US Workers plan to change jobs THIS YEAR, with increasing compensation driving three fourths of that change.
    Let's see - 3/4 of 33% is 25%. You can attempt to persuade me that the job market will have 25% more jobs from job creation and retirements - but I don't think you'll manage it even with the skewed numbers you sometimes use. Your story just proves that people's expectations seldom become reality.



    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    Really? Which is better for them - $3 an hour, or $0 an hour? Because when you put an artificial price floor on labor, you are creating unemployment. Which, after all, was the point of minimum wage laws in the first place.

    I would agree that our society starts subsidizing people when their income falls below certain levels. But we already do this for the low income - there is no reason why we would not do so for the lower income. Indeed, since we will be moving those people from zero income to low income, this would reduce the cost to the state, as they would require less subsidy.
    I don't remember any significant problems from minimum wage in the late-50's/60's and even into the 70's.

    30 million people, ~20% of the labor force, make below $10/hr. Change the wage structure and instead of 30m making an average of $8/hr you'll have 35m making $6/hr OR LESS. Assuming society pays up to minimum wage in the form of public assistance what you'd have would be payroll going from ~$500bn/yr to ~$435bn/yr and public assistance going from $75bn/yr (for the unemployed 5 mil) to ~$90bn/yr to cover the income gap.

    Further, you'd have $50bn/yr less going to the bottom 20% - and I'd bet good money the price of goods and services won't decrease. Instead, the extra $50bn will end up in the hands of people in the top 10%. I doubt they'll use that for consumer spending like the bottom 20% would.


    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    We certainly have alot of misallocation of human capital. That's not a little bit thanks to our "everyone needs to go to college!" mantra that we shove down the throats of high school students. The world does not need that many professional interpreters of Chaucer.
    I couldn't agree more about that. As a society we certainly do need to address the way we train our young people for life in the Jungle. But, sadly, the only reasonable way to make a higher wage is through a college education. People will continue to chase the carrot as long as it's the only thing within sight to eat. Even "professional interpreters of Chaucer" can be teachers, which still pay a more than janitors even figuring in the cost of college. Even if it's break even people will take it because teacher as a "respectable job" - janitor isn't.


    OMG! We agreed twice in the same day. There must be snowballs flying around in hell.



    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    Well, no. We bottomed out. We simply haven't recovered terribly well thanks to government interference. Just like the last time we tried that.

    http://liberalbias.com/images/conten...comparison.jpg
    No, society supported workers past the standard 6 month unemployment insurance window. Had society not done that many people would be dead - just like the 1930's.


    On a side note:
    Still preaching the same old crap, I see.

    Should I go back and whine about Bush needlessly spending, spending, and spending while lowering taxes??? Clinton and the Republican Congress managed to balance the budget (or damn near - depending on which numbers you use) and Bush ****ed it all up within a year and continued ****ing it up until The Crash.


    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    On the contrary, since labor is effected by supply and demand, at lower prices, there is greater demand. Nor, (as you point out above) would those people who made lower wages be homeless and starving - they would either be subsidized or (more likely) be part of a household.
    And here I thought you didn't believe in interfering with the market. LOL! If business isn't paying people enough to live on then who is???



    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    And furthermore, they need more money to help increase their standard of living. That is why economic growth and policies designed to have the most efficient labor market possible are so vital. Labor laws which artificially jack up the price of labor don't hurt the rich that much - the rich can adjust. It hurts labor, which is priced out of the market.
    As shown above, 35m people making $6/hr is worse for society than 30m making $8/hr and 5m being subsidized.


    You continue to look at only the effects on business without regard for the effects on society. An ideal business model would be $0/hr for labor - and let society foot the entire bill. What more could an employer want?!? Not so good for society, though.
    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. #644
    Sage
    MoSurveyor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Last Seen
    04-13-17 @ 04:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    9,985

    Re: How many here belong a union in the public or private sector? Why? or Why not?

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    I don't think anyone has made that argument. What most of us are saying is that the model lends itself to abuse,
    So does the standard business model.

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    is generally built around coercion,
    Ditto

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    and has destructive economic effects.
    Ditto


    Time to throw out the standard business model!
    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

  5. #645
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Last Seen
    07-16-14 @ 01:18 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    47,571

    Re: How many here belong a union in the public or private sector? Why? or Why not?

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    I don't think anyone has made that argument. What most of us are saying is that the model lends itself to abuse, is generally built around coercion, and has destructive economic effects.
    Like Mo said, the same can be said of any company that isn't union-related. The employer/employee relationship can be very volatile if there are no checks in order. Just look at history. That is the reason why unions were invented.

  6. #646
    Sage
    Cephus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    CA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    29,774

    Re: How many here belong a union in the public or private sector? Why? or Why not?

    Quote Originally Posted by ChrisL View Post
    Like Mo said, the same can be said of any company that isn't union-related. The employer/employee relationship can be very volatile if there are no checks in order. Just look at history. That is the reason why unions were invented.
    Unions were created because people worked in dangerous conditions for virtually no money. The majority of things unions were originally created for have now been corrected under the law and apply across the board. Now, unions are for the greedy.
    There is nothing demonstrably true that religion can provide the world that cannot be achieved more rationally through entirely secular means.

    Blog me! YouTube me! VidMe me!

  7. #647
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Last Seen
    07-16-14 @ 01:18 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    47,571

    Re: How many here belong a union in the public or private sector? Why? or Why not?

    Quote Originally Posted by Cephus View Post
    Unions were created because people worked in dangerous conditions for virtually no money. The majority of things unions were originally created for have now been corrected under the law and apply across the board. Now, unions are for the greedy.
    Good Lord, are you suggesting that all employers follow the law, and that employees are equal to their employers? That is beyond ridiculous.

  8. #648
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Last Seen
    07-16-14 @ 01:18 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    47,571

    Re: How many here belong a union in the public or private sector? Why? or Why not?

    What if an employee is fired wrongly from a job. That employee (who no longer has a job) has to come up with money for an attorney, money to survive while he finds a new job, etc., meanwhile his OUT of a job. Meanwhile, the employee has to also prove that he was wrongfully terminated from his job. The employer, OTH, cannot claim those same kinds of hardships. The unions help employees in these types of situations by providing legal representation, and in the case of LIUNA they also provide their "brothers" with food and other help that they need.

  9. #649
    Sage
    Cephus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    CA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    29,774

    Re: How many here belong a union in the public or private sector? Why? or Why not?

    Quote Originally Posted by ChrisL View Post
    Good Lord, are you suggesting that all employers follow the law, and that employees are equal to their employers? That is beyond ridiculous.
    The overwhelming majority do and for those that don't, there are legal means for reporting them for fine or imprisonment. A union cannot achieve anything in that regard that the individual employees cannot do on their own.

    As for the second part, where did you ever get that stupid idea? Of course the employees are not equal to their employers. The employer, and I'm speaking specifically of small business owners who start companies from scratch, have all the risk in ensuring that the business is successful, they have put in their time, money and effort to something that, for the majority of small businesses, fail in the first year. To have that be successful, to be able to employ other people, to produce things that are valuable to the public, they certainly deserve a bigger portion of the reward based on the bigger portion of the risk they took.

    What is beyond ridiculous is that you believe otherwise.
    There is nothing demonstrably true that religion can provide the world that cannot be achieved more rationally through entirely secular means.

    Blog me! YouTube me! VidMe me!

  10. #650
    Sage
    Cephus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    CA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    29,774

    Re: How many here belong a union in the public or private sector? Why? or Why not?

    Quote Originally Posted by ChrisL View Post
    What if an employee is fired wrongly from a job. That employee (who no longer has a job) has to come up with money for an attorney, money to survive while he finds a new job, etc., meanwhile his OUT of a job. Meanwhile, the employee has to also prove that he was wrongfully terminated from his job. The employer, OTH, cannot claim those same kinds of hardships. The unions help employees in these types of situations by providing legal representation, and in the case of LIUNA they also provide their "brothers" with food and other help that they need.

    Define "wrongly". If they were discriminated against, say for their race or gender, there are certainly avenues that they can pursue that cost nothing, plus there are plenty of groups out there that will take the case pro bono if it's sufficiently grievous. Yes though, he's out of a job. Welcome to life.

    But you turn around and take a union shop, especially when it's a big national union that has no stake in the health of the individual shop, which pushes for absurd wages and benefits, to the point that the company can not expand or improve or stay competitive, and in fact, goes out of business altogether. Then, you're absolutely wrong, the employer can claim all the same things because not only do they no longer have a job, they've probably lost their homes and all the things they mortgaged to the hilt to start the company in the first place.
    There is nothing demonstrably true that religion can provide the world that cannot be achieved more rationally through entirely secular means.

    Blog me! YouTube me! VidMe me!

Page 65 of 78 FirstFirst ... 1555636465666775 ... 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
  •