what is your opinion of unions?

[Xavier434]

Originally posted by: Train
without being specific on any powers.. you seem to just be arguing for the sake of arguing.

What powers (be specific) does a union need that a free market can't provide?

Name one.

There is nothing that a free market cannot provide which a union can. The question is whether or not that free market will or will not provide it and why. A union, on the other hand, can make much more solid guarantees due to certain contracts in place.

For example, the teacher's union in my county 100% guarantees that all members of the teacher's union will get a minimum of 2.67% raise every year. That is something that a system like the free market cannot 100% guarantee. It can provide it, but it cannot guarantee it.

The county next to mine tried to force many teachers to take a pay cut. The union made it so they didn't get a raise but they didn't have to take a cut either. Again, this is something that a free market can provide but never guarantee.

 

[Train]

Originally posted by: Xavier434

Originally posted by: Train
without being specific on any powers.. you seem to just be arguing for the sake of arguing.

What powers (be specific) does a union need that a free market can't provide?

Name one.

There is nothing that a free market cannot provide which a union can. The question is whether or not that free market will or will not provide it and why. A union, on the other hand, can make much more solid guarantees due to certain contracts in place.

For example, the teacher's union in my county 100% guarantees that all members of the teacher's union will get a minimum of 2.67% raise every year. That is something that a system like the free market cannot 100% guarantee. It can provide it, but it cannot guarantee it. The county next to mine forced many teachers to take a pay cut that were not a part of the union. Those who were in the union got no raise this past year regardless of performance. So there you go.

You have to have a union to have a contract? Thats funny, I seem to see contracts all the time that have nothing to do with unions. There is nothing you mention that todays non union workplace cannot do. Guarenteed COL raises? Those exist right now in non union environments... so again.. is there any example? One?

Just one, please!

 

[Future Guy]

Unions are bad when they financially hand-tie a company, like the UAW has done and what teacher's unions have done. They demand more money when company's just can't do it. If GM didn't have so much cost in their vehicles, I'm guessing they'd be in a better position than they are. Their competitors are not hand-tied like they are, which makes a big difference and the unions don't give a damn. They need to wake up and realize that if the company goes down, they're out of a job entirely. What's better, having a job or not having a job? I'd say having a job.

 

[Xavier434]

Originally posted by: Train

Originally posted by: Xavier434

Originally posted by: Train
without being specific on any powers.. you seem to just be arguing for the sake of arguing.

What powers (be specific) does a union need that a free market can't provide?

Name one.

There is nothing that a free market cannot provide which a union can. The question is whether or not that free market will or will not provide it and why. A union, on the other hand, can make much more solid guarantees due to certain contracts in place.

For example, the teacher's union in my county 100% guarantees that all members of the teacher's union will get a minimum of 2.67% raise every year. That is something that a system like the free market cannot 100% guarantee. It can provide it, but it cannot guarantee it. The county next to mine forced many teachers to take a pay cut that were not a part of the union. Those who were in the union got no raise this past year regardless of performance. So there you go.

You have to have a union to have a contract? Thats funny, I seem to see contracts all the time that have nothing to do with unions. There is nothing you mention that todays non union workplace cannot do. Guarenteed COL raises? Those exist right now in non union environments... so again.. is there any example? One?

Just one, please!

Again, it is not about what a free market can or cannot provide. It is about what it will or will not provide on a case by case basis. This case by case basis 100% revolves around the people who hold the power just like I have been saying to you all along. Some of these people would do very well in a complete free market society and would provide very fair treatment to everyone. More power to them I say!

Unfortunately, others would not to the point of being a serious scumbag out of their own selfish and greedy nature. A free market allows for both of these types of people to exist and the sad part is there are too many overly selfish and greedy people out there. In some cases, the way that a free market system works provides an adequate amount of checks and balances to counter the greedy scumbag types thanks to plentiful competition. In other cases, it does not and heavily works against the little people due to lack of competition in a single area for one reason or another.

This is why I support a mixture on a case by case basis. It is more complicated, but I believe it is closer to the true balance that we need. Keep in mind that what I support is just a system. I do not necessarily support how that system is being utilized in its current state. There are many improvements which could be made.

 

[Train]

your still beating around the bush...

And failing to answer the question.

And since you probably won't (or can't) answer it, then it goes back to the original problem. Why do they have special protections in the first place? Especially if these special protections only protect the BAD unions? Why? well likely because most unions are of the bad (re: extortion) type and spend lots of money and propaganda in politics to keep it that way, and these unions rely on the special protections that keep them from having to compete in a free market like everyone else.

 

[Xavier434]

Originally posted by: Train
your still beating around the bush...

And failing to answer the question.

And since you probably won't (or can't) answer it, then it goes back to the original problem. Why do they have special protections in the first place? Especially if these special protections only protect the BAD unions? Why? well likely because most unions are of the bad (re: extortion) type and spend lots of money and propaganda in politics to keep it that way, and these unions rely on the special protections that keep them from having to compete in a free market like everyone else.

I answered your question. You asked me what a union can provide that the free market cannot. The answer is nothing. The problem is that you are asking the wrong question. What the free market can provide means nothing if they are not willing to provide it which is exactly what has happened that caused people to gather and form unions in the first place.

In the end, you are making far to many assumptions without any experience in regards to unions and how many of them abuse their rights. Plenty of them do. Plenty of them do not. However, the answer lies within plugging up the loopholes. It is not stripping them of most of their power and purpose just so that the idea of a free market can run rampant in every scenario. It really isn't the heaven you make it out to be. It has plenty of flaws to you know which merit interference and control over.

Have you ever even been a part of a union or worked for one to find out the ins and outs or are you strictly basing your decisions on what you read about over the internet or what you hear from people who just so happen to share your viewpoint?

 

[Train]

Originally posted by: Xavier434
I answered your question. You asked me what a union can provide that the free market cannot. The answer is nothing. The problem is that you are asking the wrong question.
What the free market can provide means nothing if they are not willing to provide it

It? Provide what? What is "it"? You already said nothing so what's the remaining "it" you keep speaking of?

 

[Xavier434]

Originally posted by: Train

Originally posted by: Xavier434
I answered your question. You asked me what a union can provide that the free market cannot. The answer is nothing. The problem is that you are asking the wrong question.
What the free market can provide means nothing if they are not willing to provide it

It? Provide what? What is "it"? You already said nothing so what's the remaining "it" you keep speaking of?

Fair and quality treatment, job security, etc.

 

[Train]

Originally posted by: Xavier434

Originally posted by: Train

Originally posted by: Xavier434
I answered your question. You asked me what a union can provide that the free market cannot. The answer is nothing. The problem is that you are asking the wrong question.
What the free market can provide means nothing if they are not willing to provide it

It? Provide what? What is "it"? You already said nothing so what's the remaining "it" you keep speaking of?

Fair and quality treatment, job security, etc.

Again, the free market can provide that through its basic mechanisms of supply and demand. Not getting paid enough? Ask for more, or get another job. Still can't get "enough" pay? Your in an inflated profession, time to move. It will all equal out in the end. As actual facts and hard data have shown (see links and quoted studies above) unionized industries are often the worst off. They inflated themselves to the point where they arent just hurting themselves, they are hurting the entire economy.

A union without extortion abilities (companies cant extort, so why can unions?) will be forced to adjust to the times just as businesses are forced to do every day. Life not as cushy without legalized extortion? tough, welcome to "fair".

 

[Xavier434]

Originally posted by: Train

Originally posted by: Xavier434

Originally posted by: Train

Originally posted by: Xavier434
I answered your question. You asked me what a union can provide that the free market cannot. The answer is nothing. The problem is that you are asking the wrong question.
What the free market can provide means nothing if they are not willing to provide it

It? Provide what? What is "it"? You already said nothing so what's the remaining "it" you keep speaking of?

Fair and quality treatment, job security, etc.

Again, the free market can provide that through its basic mechanisms of supply and demand. Not getting paid enough? Ask for more, or get another job. Still can't get "enough" pay? Your in an inflated profession, time to move. It will all equal out in the end. As actual facts and hard data have shown (see links and quoted studies above) unionized industries are often the worst off. They inflated themselves to the point where they arent just hurting themselves, they are hurting the entire economy.

A union without extortion abilities (companies cant extort, wo why can unions?) will be forced to adjust to the times just as businesses are forced to do every day. Life not as cushy without legalized extortion? tough, welcome to "fair".

Look, if you are unable to see how unfair a lot of employers can be towards their employees in today's free market then there really is not reason to discuss this any further. It's quite obvious that just like unions, the free market needs regulation and rules.

When are libertarians going to learn that too much freedom is a bad thing because too many people are just too damn selfish and greedy to enjoy that kind of privilege and responsibility? If people weren't so greedy and selfish and instead were willing to work with each other more then maybe I would support more libertarian view points but until they manage to change the American people I will continue to support what I support. They need to change the people first before they change the government. In the mean time, it will be the people that destroy their ideas...not the government. For some reason, they have faith that people's greed, selfishness, and corruption is not a concern when considering how much freedom we give them. The government adopting more libertarian approaches is not going to just magically take away the selfishness of people and nor will reduce the amount that we effect each other's lives whether we like it or not.

 

[Train]

Fairness in Freedom is dependent on greed. Even if you assume every single person in a free market is 100% greed motivated, it will all work out ok, because they will be forced to compete.

Again, whats to stop you from joining/forming a 100% employee owned contracting company? And the company has a single point of bargaining for work?

How is that any different than a union? I'll tell you, they arent aloud to extort themselves any higher than what the market will bear.

You complain about greed yet all I'm askng for is for the legalized extortion to be removed. Extortion IS greed! Either you are not following this enough to realize you are arguing yourself in circles, or you LIKE the fact that unions are the real unchecked greed in todays economy.

 

[Xavier434]

Originally posted by: Train
Fairness in Freedom is dependent on greed. Even if you assume every single person in a free market is 100% greed motivated, it will all work out ok, because they will be forced to compete.

Again, whats to stop you from joining/forming a 100% employee owned contracting company? And the company has a single point of bargaining for work?

How is that any different than a union? I'll tell you, they arent aloud to extort themselves any higher than what the market will bear.

You complain about greed yet all I'm askng for is for the legalized extortion to be removed. Extortion IS greed! Either you are not following this enough to realize you are arguing yourself in circles, or you LIKE the fact that unions are the real unchecked greed in todays economy.

The government doesn't believe that what they are doing is considered extortion. In some cases, neither do I. In other cases, I disagree with their methods. In either case, I do not believe we should just take away their power. Instead, I think the rules need to be more clearly defined in regards to what they can and cannot do in order to limit abuse.


***EDIT***

Look man, not matter what you do and say, you are not going to get your way. There are too many people out there that understand that there are too many employers that abuse every penny that they can get their mits on. These people don't like that and they don't want them to have such a great amount of power. Libertarianism tried many moons ago and they lost because the people tore the system apart out of their own greed. They shot themselves in the foot because they were not responsible enough to handle that degree of freedom which is a real shame for those of us that are selfless and responsible enough to handle it. If we wipe the floor clean and start over I can guarantee you that we will just end up right back here again. People will demand more government as they see other people abuse them. They will demand that someone take control.

 

[Train]

Originally posted by: Xavier434
The government doesn't believe that what they are doing is considered extortion. In some cases, neither do I. In other cases, I disagree with their methods. In either case, I do not believe we should just take away their power. Instead, I think the rules need to be more clearly defined in regards to what they can and cannot do in order to limit abuse.

Your persistently void of anything specific. When exactly is extortion a good thing? How can you allow/disallow extortion on a case by case basis? What kind of precedent could you possibly be ok with setting by allowing even a single case of legal extortion?

 

[Xavier434]

Originally posted by: Train

Originally posted by: Xavier434
The government doesn't believe that what they are doing is considered extortion. In some cases, neither do I. In other cases, I disagree with their methods. In either case, I do not believe we should just take away their power. Instead, I think the rules need to be more clearly defined in regards to what they can and cannot do in order to limit abuse.

Your persistently void of anything specific. When exactly is extortion a good thing? How can you allow/disallow extortion on a case by case basis? What kind of precedent could you possibly be ok with setting by allowing even a single case of legal extortion?

You do realize that all changes which a union plays a role in are a part of a written agreement right? The business/government and the union come to these agreements even though they may not like it. It is still an agreement all the same and it is in writing. How is that extortion if the two parties come to an agreement?

 

[Eeezee]

Train, your absolute faith in a free market is just naive. Some aspects of a free market are undesirable. A free market brings a lot of good, but it brings bad with it. It's in no way a perfect system.

I don't think unions should be able to extort anyone, but there are many optional unions that lack the power to extort anyone anyway. Let's not overgeneralize here.

I think you need to go retake a few history courses. The market does NOT always "balance itself out." In fact, it seldom does. Markets with very little regulation often end up bubbling and crashing. History has shown this happen again and again and again. Free markets are far from perfect, and your sort of idealism is utterly wrong.

 

[Eeezee]

Originally posted by: Xavier434

Originally posted by: Train

Originally posted by: Xavier434
The government doesn't believe that what they are doing is considered extortion. In some cases, neither do I. In other cases, I disagree with their methods. In either case, I do not believe we should just take away their power. Instead, I think the rules need to be more clearly defined in regards to what they can and cannot do in order to limit abuse.

Your persistently void of anything specific. When exactly is extortion a good thing? How can you allow/disallow extortion on a case by case basis? What kind of precedent could you possibly be ok with setting by allowing even a single case of legal extortion?

You do realize that all changes which a union plays a role in are a part of a written agreement right? The business/government and the union come to these agreements even though they may not like it. It is still an agreement all the same and it is in writing. How is that extortion if the two parties come to an agreement?

Indeed, I know at least in California that it's illegal for unions to "extort" anyone. If they refuse to bargain, then they're not allowed to strike by law. Likewise, if a company refuses to bargain, the union is legally allowed to strike. It's a 2-way street; neither side can extort the other.

For instance, if the union wants to increase salaries, the company is required to at least discuss; for instance, they could offer to increase salaries while cutting healthcare benefits. Likewise, if the company wants to decrease salaries, the workers can demand something in return. By law, neither said can simply say "no"

 

[Train]

Originally posted by: Xavier434

Originally posted by: Train

Originally posted by: Xavier434
The government doesn't believe that what they are doing is considered extortion. In some cases, neither do I. In other cases, I disagree with their methods. In either case, I do not believe we should just take away their power. Instead, I think the rules need to be more clearly defined in regards to what they can and cannot do in order to limit abuse.

Your persistently void of anything specific. When exactly is extortion a good thing? How can you allow/disallow extortion on a case by case basis? What kind of precedent could you possibly be ok with setting by allowing even a single case of legal extortion?

You do realize that all changes which a union plays a role in are a part of a written agreement right? The business/government and the union come to these agreements even though they may not like it. It is still an agreement all the same and it is in writing. How is that extortion if the two parties come to an agreement?

jeebus man I didnt realize I had to break it down to 3rd grade level for you.

Extortion example:

Company X has a union workforce. The company buys from supplier A, supplier A uses non-union labor. The union workforce tells company X they have to buy from supplier B, a union workforce, or they walk out. Company X has been extorted to change its supplier. Even if supplier B has higher prices and lower quality, it doesnt matter, they dont have a choice. This is exactly how the UAW not only got a hold of the big 3, but also into every single one of thier suppliers.

The same thing is not legal in any other organization other than unions. Because of thier special "definition" they lobbied themselves into back when Anti Trust laws were first being applied to corporations. The unions saw thier extortion power in danger just as the corporations were losing thiers. So they moved to change the definition of what they were, and special protections along with it, to preserve thier extortion power for years to come. Its a legal injustice that that will be perpetuated by those who benifit from it.


Same example, using corporations instead of unions:

Dell sells computers with MS Windows on them, they also sell a smaller but growing percentage of computers with Linux on them. If MS were to tell Dell today that they have to ONLY sell computers with Windows on them, they would have to, else they would go under. Linux installs or barebones kits simply do not make enough to keep Dell afloat. This is of course illegal. Dell is protected from extortion.

 

[Train]

Originally posted by: Eeezee
Train, your absolute faith in a free market is just naive. Some aspects of a free market are undesirable. A free market brings a lot of good, but it brings bad with it. It's in no way a perfect system.

I don't think unions should be able to extort anyone, but there are many optional unions that lack the power to extort anyone anyway. Let's not overgeneralize here.

I think you need to go retake a few history courses. The market does NOT always "balance itself out." In fact, it seldom does. Markets with very little regulation often end up bubbling and crashing. History has shown this happen again and again and again. Free markets are far from perfect, and your sort of idealism is utterly wrong.

When has there ever been a free market? unions existed prior to anti trust laws... therefore theres never been such a thing. The "bad" stuff unions like to point out regarding free markets were caused by the unions themselves. Just look at actual history of unionized industries in the US. They do more harm than good. Yes ACTUAL HISTORY, not union propaganda history.

I don't think unions should be able to extort anyone, but there are many optional unions that lack the power to extort anyone anyway. Let's not overgeneralize here.

So then whats the problem? If the "good unions" dont use extortion, why are you against removing the legal extortion? Please someone just answer this frikkin question.

 

[bctbct]

Train, give up on the monopoly crap. There is no monopoly. Any group of employees can band together in the parking lot tommorow and say we wont work unless you do "X"

A strike occurs when the contract has expired and everyone can be fired. It is a extremely rare occasion that a walk out occurs and probably related to safety when it does.

The difference is that the average worker does not have the balls to fight for what they want. In fact the average worker has sucked off the tit of the Union by enjoying the things WE have fought for that were given to YOU.

Breaks
40 hour work week
OSHA
child labor laws
work comp laws
minumum wage laws

I dont understand why you would care about something that obviously does not effect you.

 

[Train]

Originally posted by: bctbct
<blah blah wrong wrong etc>
...
I dont understand why you would care about something that obviously does not effect you.

As the facts prove, unions dont just hurt themselves, they hurt the entire economy.

 

[BlahBlahYouToo]

Originally posted by: bctbct
Train, give up on the monopoly crap. There is no monopoly. Any group of employees can band together in the parking lot tommorow and say we wont work unless you do "X"

A strike occurs when the contract has expired and everyone can be fired. It is a extremely rare occasion that a walk out occurs and probably related to safety when it does.

The difference is that the average worker does not have the balls to fight for what they want. In fact the average worker has sucked off the tit of the Union by enjoying the things WE have fought for that were given to YOU.

Breaks
40 hour work week
OSHA
child labor laws
work comp laws
minumum wage laws

I dont understand why you would care about something that obviously does not effect you.

MTA strike made it a PITA for millions to get to work, myself included.
UAW crippling GM, Ford - if they go belly up, we're all going to feel it.

 

[bctbct]

Originally posted by: BlahBlahYouToo

Originally posted by: bctbct
Train, give up on the monopoly crap. There is no monopoly. Any group of employees can band together in the parking lot tommorow and say we wont work unless you do "X"

A strike occurs when the contract has expired and everyone can be fired. It is a extremely rare occasion that a walk out occurs and probably related to safety when it does.

The difference is that the average worker does not have the balls to fight for what they want. In fact the average worker has sucked off the tit of the Union by enjoying the things WE have fought for that were given to YOU.

Breaks
40 hour work week
OSHA
child labor laws
work comp laws
minumum wage laws

I dont understand why you would care about something that obviously does not effect you.

MTA strike made it a PITA for millions to get to work, myself included.

You are quick to blame the workers while the MTA has taken responsibility for provoking the workers.

UAW crippling GM, Ford - if they go belly up, we're all going to feel it.

Those Unions have made concession after concession while the managment team has made poor designs and lined their pockets with the salary cuts.

 

[TehMac]

Originally posted by: bctbct


Those Unions have made concession after concession while the managment team has made poor designs and lined their pockets with the salary cuts.

How about the food unions?

They're not making any concessions. If anything, the reverse of your statement applies. :laugh:

 

[Eeezee]

Originally posted by: Train

Originally posted by: Eeezee
Train, your absolute faith in a free market is just naive. Some aspects of a free market are undesirable. A free market brings a lot of good, but it brings bad with it. It's in no way a perfect system.

I don't think unions should be able to extort anyone, but there are many optional unions that lack the power to extort anyone anyway. Let's not overgeneralize here.

I think you need to go retake a few history courses. The market does NOT always "balance itself out." In fact, it seldom does. Markets with very little regulation often end up bubbling and crashing. History has shown this happen again and again and again. Free markets are far from perfect, and your sort of idealism is utterly wrong.

When has there ever been a free market? unions existed prior to anti trust laws... therefore theres never been such a thing. The "bad" stuff unions like to point out regarding free markets were caused by the unions themselves. Just look at actual history of unionized industries in the US. They do more harm than good. Yes ACTUAL HISTORY, not union propaganda history.

I don't think unions should be able to extort anyone, but there are many optional unions that lack the power to extort anyone anyway. Let's not overgeneralize here.

So then whats the problem? If the "good unions" dont use extortion, why are you against removing the legal extortion? Please someone just answer this frikkin question.

Who's against keeping union extortion illegal? It's already illegal in many states (even in socialist California, the state that all conservatives love to hate). Did you completely ignore my other post? Go read it again.

I just don't think that the federal government should be the ones making these laws. If your state allows unions to use extortion, then how about you do something about it instead of trolling ATOT in your condescending manner?

Train, in your idiocy you have forgotten that unions are a part of a free market. Go educate yourself before you pretend to know anything. Also, where can I get some of this "union propaganda history?" What union are you even talking about? How about some specifics instead of vague details covered in vitriol?

 

[JS80]

So pathetic that in today's society with all the wealth of knowledge, high standards of living, and transparency in economics and business, that some idealistic fools still justify the existence of unions. I guess that's why half the population is going to vote for a Marxist this election.