End Priveleged Class, End Unions.

[Throckmorton]

No. I'm for people making a choice. In the case of Wisconsin and other non-right to work states many workers do not have the choice to negotiate directly with their employer and have to pay a 3rd party(through extortion) for the supposed "protection" the union claim they provide.

How's individual negotiation working out for Wal Mart employees?

 

[bfdd]

Unless the 1st amendment is repealed, how does one shut down the collective bargaining rights of a group that is legally allowed to form? It would seem any such legislation, to me, would be considered unconstitutional.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

How's individual negotiation working out for Wal Mart employees?

http://www.walb.com/Global/story.asp?S=14143433

fine?

 

[Craig234]

Unless the 1st amendment is repealed, how does one shut down the collective bargaining rights of a group that is legally allowed to form? It would seem any such legislation, to me, would be considered unconstitutional.

You could use reading the history of the labor movement and what the laws do and why they're needed. At least you have an honest question.

I can usually suggest a book, but on this, it's been covered as a side issue, I don't know a good single resource for you, but google should be useful.

 

[bfdd]

You could use reading the history of the labor movement and what the laws do and why they're needed. At least you have an honest question.

I can usually suggest a book, but on this, it's been covered as a side issue, I don't know a good single resource for you, but google should be useful.

Uh... I do know a little about the history and it pretty much backs what I have been saying. We have the 1st amendment right to organize. This allows us to form political parties, charities, corporations, whatever. Inherent in the right to organize is the right for the group to bargain as a single entity. What happened was our government failed to do it's most basic job, which was to enforce and protect our rights. Nothing you say will change that very simple fact. If the government had been doing its job all along, we wouldn't have needed tons of extra regulations and legislation to prop up unions.

ps- part of joining the union I was in was sitting through an orientation class(es), which went over a lot of that history you're talking about. I've heard the spin from all the sides that have a stake in it. Unions are not a bad thing, only an idiot would think so.

 

[Fandango21]

In a way, I blame liberals and even unions especially for not doing a better job educating the public and allowing the right-wing propaganda to lie to people like you.

When Bush appoints *industry representatives* to oversee regulatory enforcement of those industries, people like you don't give a crap - it's all just 'government waste' to you.

And when unions are guttted, when the US is drug down and down while the most rich shift all the money 'saved' to their own ownership of every wealth-producing asset in the nation crippling opportunity and 'entrepeneurship' and setting records on the gap between the rich and everyone else, you clap like a seal. Yay, yay, yay the bad workers lose!

I agree with the fact that people are most definately uneducated on what is going on. Myself included sometimes. There is no real fact system anymore. The news media has gone down the tubes and unless you can check a million or so independent sites that report just straight facts than it's going to be hard to piece together. I think the bigger picture issue here is there is no real right or left thing at all. The saying goes "divide and conquer". What's really going on is what everyone is saying. The super elite people in power are pulling the wool over our eyes and choosing what they want to happen. They use these opposing viewpoint issues to distract us from what they actually do. They don't care about us, they simply care about anything they can do for themselves. If no one has read history and seen where this leads and what we had to overcome just to get to this point then I suggest they do so.

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

You can ask Haley Barbour about the constitutional right to collectively bargain, he specifically stated on Sunday on MtP that such a thing didn't exist. He got kind of cut off and they moved on, but I wish they had stayed on that point a bit. It seems pretty clear that assembly + speech = collective bargaining, and I'd like to hear someone like Barbour try to argue to the contrary.

 

[bfdd]

You can ask Haley Barbour about the constitutional right to collectively bargain, he specifically stated on Sunday on MtP that such a thing didn't exist. He got kind of cut off and they moved on, but I wish they had stayed on that point a bit. It seems pretty clear that assembly + speech = collective bargaining, and I'd like to hear someone like Barbour try to argue to the contrary.

It takes an ignoramus of enormous proportions to not come to this conclusion.

 

[Throckmorton]

http://www.walb.com/Global/story.asp?S=14143433

fine?

Yes, if your idea of "fine" is creating "hundreds of jobs" far below living wage. Wal Mart is the leader of the pack in the race to the bottom.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Yes, if your idea of "fine" is creating "hundreds of jobs" far below living wage. Wal Mart is the leader of the pack in the race to the bottom.

"living wage"? ah yes... 🙄

 

[Throckmorton]

"living wage"? ah yes... 🙄

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Living_wage

Living wage is a term used to describe the minimum hourly wage necessary for an individual to meet basic needs, including shelter (housing) and other incidentals such as clothing and nutrition, for an extended period of time or a lifetime. In developed countries such as the United Kingdom or Switzerland, this standard generally means that a person working forty hours a week, with no additional income, should be able to afford a specified quality or quantity of housing, food, utilities, transport, health care, and recreation.

If a job doesn't pay living wage, it's a drain on society because it forces a person to make up the difference with debt or government services. You know Wal Mart tells its employees to apply for Medicare and Food Stamps right? Paid for by us, the taxpayers.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Living_wage

If a job doesn't pay living wage, it's a drain on society because it forces a person to make up the difference with debt or government services. You know Wal Mart tells its employees to apply for Medicare and Food Stamps right? Paid for by us, the taxpayers.

I know the liberal wet dream definition of "living wage" - I just think it's nothing but a bullshit feelgood attempt at wage control. It's what "progressives" use to suggest that free market wages aren't enough for people. Sorry, but it's nonsense. If a person doesn't think they make enough - maybe they should find a different job. If enough people won't work for a $/wage - employers must up their wages to attract the employees needed. No need for any feel good progressive BS - it just works. 🙂

 

[Phokus]

I know the liberal wet dream definition of "living wage" - I just think it's nothing but a bullshit feelgood attempt at wage control. It's what "progressives" use to suggest that free market wages aren't enough for people. Sorry, but it's nonsense. If a person doesn't think they make enough - maybe they should find a different job. If enough people won't work for a $/wage - employers must up their wages to attract the employees needed. No need for any feel good progressive BS - it just works. 🙂

THERE ARE NO FUCKING JOBS. Why do you idiot conservatives keep saying that stupid shit? That's the whole point of global labor arbitrage: To increase the supply of labor exponentially and thus decrease wages/choices. It's not just millions of Americans competing for jobs, it's hundreds of millions, maybe even billions, of global citizens competing for them.

 

[Phokus]

Unions are not a bad thing, only an idiot would think so.

But unions might as well not exist without those so-called 'government protections' you keep harping about because they have ZERO leverage. Saying you're 'for' unions (via ONLY 1st amendment rights) in practicality means you DON'T want unions.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

THERE ARE NO FUCKING JOBS. Why do you idiot conservatives keep saying that stupid shit? That's the whole point of global labor arbitrage: To increase the supply of labor exponentially and thus decrease wages/choices. It's not just millions of Americans competing for jobs, it's hundreds of millions, maybe even billions, of global citizens competing for them.

lol, except your little argument fails when the economy is good and there are jobs. A couple years ago there were plenty of jobs yet you "progressives" (liberals who don't want to be called liberals) were still yapping about "living wage".
The point is - people have a choice in where they work. If you don't like it - find something better. No one is entitled to a job or a paycheck they can live comfortably with. There is no reason an unskilled job should allow the same comfort as a skilled position - it's just the way it is.
But the discussion has wandered from the topic now... try a different thread if you want to keep going. 🙂

 

[Phokus]

lol, except your little argument fails when the economy is good and there are jobs. A couple years ago there were plenty of jobs yet you "progressives" (liberals who don't want to be called liberals) were still yapping about "living wage".
The point is - people have a choice in where they work. If you don't like it - find something better. No one is entitled to a job or a paycheck they can live comfortably with. There is no reason an unskilled job should allow the same comfort as a skilled position - it's just the way it is.
But the discussion has wandered from the topic now... try a different thread if you want to keep going. 🙂

1) Are you on fucking crack? REALITY CHECK: A 'couple years ago', our 'economy' was based on a fucking real estate bubble - it was a FAKE economy built on a house of lies, you dimwit. Every recovery we've had has been weaker and weaker. You just haven't realized it because it's taken decades. If we went from the peak of our manufacturing economy to today in the span of a few years, there would be RIOTS right now.

2) "There is no reason an unskilled job should allow the same comfort as a skilled position - it's just the way it is. "

Are you insane? You do fucking realize that skilled positions are leaving the country as well, right? This isn't about low skilled jobs anymore.

 

[bfdd]

But unions might as well not exist without those so-called 'government protections' you keep harping about because they have ZERO leverage. Saying you're 'for' unions (via ONLY 1st amendment rights) in practicality means you DON'T want unions.

What do you mean they have zero leverage? The entire premise of a union is a group of people who bargain for mutual benefit. With the right to organize and the right to free speech that can be realized. The regulation and legislation you're saying are needed were only needed because the Federal Government did NOT do it's job, which is to enforce and protect our rights.

It really is a very simple thing. I'm not saying what happened back then was right, only an idiot would say that, but what came out of it was not right either. Instead of writing more and more law, we need to enforce and respect the ones we currently have. Without that, what's the point of more law?

Honestly why are you even arguing with me? The only point you're making is mine.

 

[Phokus]

What do you mean they have zero leverage? The entire premise of a union is a group of people who bargain for mutual benefit. With the right to organize and the right to free speech that can be realized. The regulation and legislation you're saying are needed were only needed because the Federal Government did NOT do it's job, which is to enforce and protect our rights.

It really is a very simple thing. I'm not saying what happened back then was right, only an idiot would say that, but what came out of it was not right either. Instead of writing more and more law, we need to enforce and respect the ones we currently have. Without that, what's the point of more law?

Honestly why are you even arguing with me? The only point you're making is mine.

We're not in agreement. Libertarians say they're 'for' unions so long as they don't get preferential government treatment. But you might as well just say that you're against unions, because business has all the cards: They have the capital to outlast strikes, they can move production elsewhere, they can hire scabs, if they have balls, they can just shut down business and fire everyone (see walmart).

I'm trying my damndest to remember which libertarian economist (maybe Hayek?) said this, but even he recognized that a business, an owner of capital has the upper hand in negotiating wages over someone who needs to put food on his table because the owner of capital can last far longer in a war of attrition than a worker. I just don't understand how you can't see this.

 

[bfdd]

Phokus, since when have I said I'm for businesses getting preferential treatment? Please don't lump me in with some pre-determined definition of a group you have. I belong to no like-minded group. The things you're scared of are only worrisome if people continue to be idiots and if we've learned anything no amount of legislation is going to cure that. If a company up and fires everyone for striking, why would anyone else want to work there? To risk a similar fate? Please, again only idiots. They can move their shit to another place, we can in turn boycott it. If big business leaves, small businesses will rise to fill the niche.

If you haven't noticed by now, I'm all about flipping the bird to as many people as possible, I don't give a fuck how much they make, who they are, or what they do. The only reason you believe these people hold power over you and others is because you let them.

 

[Phokus]

Phokus, since when have I said I'm for businesses getting preferential treatment? Please don't lump me in with some pre-determined definition of a group you have. I belong to no like-minded group. The things you're scared of are only worrisome if people continue to be idiots and if we've learned anything no amount of legislation is going to cure that. If a company up and fires everyone for striking, why would anyone else want to work there? To risk a similar fate? Please, again only idiots. They can move their shit to another place, we can in turn boycott it. If big business leaves, small businesses will rise to fill the niche.

If you haven't noticed by now, I'm all about flipping the bird to as many people as possible, I don't give a fuck how much they make, who they are, or what they do. The only reason you believe these people hold power over you and others is because you let them.

Where did i say you were for businesses getting preferential treatment? They don't need preferential treatment from the government, because they hold all the cards ALREADY.

They can move their shit to another place, we can in turn boycott it.

GAHAHAHAHA, are you serious? The average American is a spineless fuckwad. Even when people DO strike, nobody pays attention. Too busy watching American idol or something.

 

[bfdd]

How does big business hold all the cards when they can't function without employees? That is completely asinine. If everyone stopped working, they would have nothing. We choose to be employed here, we aren't slaves. The average American is not a spineless fuckwad, shit just isn't "bad" enough for most due to all the crap the Feds have been doing to prevent the inevitable collapse.

 

[Phokus]

How does big business hold all the cards when they can't function without employees? That is completely asinine. If everyone stopped working, they would have nothing. We choose to be employed here, we aren't slaves. The average American is not a spineless fuckwad, shit just isn't "bad" enough for most due to all the crap the Feds have been doing to prevent the inevitable collapse.

Easy: If Supply of Labor far outstrips Demand for labor, you don't have have to worry about 'not having employees'.

Here are a couple of CEO's explaining it if isn't clear enough:

At last summer’s Aspen Ideas Festival, Michael Splinter, CEO of the Silicon Valley green-tech firm Applied Materials, said that if he were starting from scratch, only 20 percent of his workforce would be domestic. “This year, almost 90 percent of our sales will be outside the U.S.,” he explained. “The pull to be close to the customers—most of them in Asia—is enormous.” Speaking at the same conference, Thomas Wilson, CEO of Allstate, also lamented this global reality: “I can get [workers] anywhere in the world. It is a problem for America, but it is not necessarily a problem for American business … American businesses will adapt.”

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2011/01/the-rise-of-the-new-global-elite/8343/5/

 

[bfdd]

Yeah and like I said small business would rise to fill the niches that emptied when big business left. It wouldn't be that big of an issue imo. You raise them to the level of gods with your view point, I keep them very firmly attached to the ground at eye level because they are just man.

 

[FuzzyBee]

When Bush appoints *industry representatives* to oversee regulatory enforcement of those industries, people like you don't give a crap - it's all just 'government waste' to you.

As opposed to *banking representatives* being appointed to oversee regulatory enforcement of *banking*? Where's the frothing now?

 

[Phokus]

Yeah and like I said small business would rise to fill the niches that emptied when big business left. It wouldn't be that big of an issue imo. You raise them to the level of gods with your view point, I keep them very firmly attached to the ground at eye level because they are just man.

You're clearly not 'getting' it. Big business hasn't only recovered but they're producing record profits. Something like 10 years ago, 33% of their profits were international, now it's up to 50%. Small business typically doesn't have much, if any, international sales so they're hurting because they depend more on domestic sales.