Where does the rights hatred of unions come from?????????[W:536]

[Spartacus FPV]

I am for unions because I love individual liberty.

Nothing more individual than a collective!

 

[Jack Hays]

I am for unions because I love individual liberty.

Unions celebrate a collective over the individual.

 

[JumpinJack]

Nothing more individual than a collective!

And that's what a corporation is! There's nothing whatsoever "individual" about corporations.

Unions help protect the rights of the individual, when dealing with a collective, who holds all the cards, and as history has shown, will drive its employees into the ground, if allowed to.

 

[JumpinJack]

Unions celebrate a collective over the individual.

CORPORATIONS celebrate the collective called the corporation over the rights of the individual.

Unions protect the rights of the individual when dealing with a conglomerate called a corporation. Corporations being called "individual" is laughable.

 

[PeteEU]

It's not a matter of supporting corporations over workers,

That was the whole foundation of Unions... that the employers were exploiting the employees and there was no one to help/talk for the employees. That is where the right started to hate unions because they were a threat to their political base, the rich business owners. Of course unions also came around at the time socialism was born as a political force, which also was a massive threat the to the status quo which was run by the conservative right.. hence the right saw the new "left" as a threat and used all sorts of methods to hit down on them, including mass murder.

it's matter of not supporting corrupt organizations that artificially inflate wages,

Counter argument is that the corrupt organization is the company/employer who exploits the workers and bags the extra profits because of this.

making us less competitive in the int'l market and driving jobs overseas.

Yes it is so much better to have a society as poor as Chinas or Indias, where the masses cant feed their families but hey the wages are low so that the upper classes can get stuff cheaper right?

It's hating the fact that unions buy and sell politicians every day of the week.

Wait what? And companies dont? Come on they invented the freaking process. Rich landowners, usually the Church, controlled the political leadership going back 1000s of years. It is nothing new. Who do you think controlled the rise of the industrial revolution.. the workers? LOL.. who allowed the exploitation of children and women in massive factories in Liverpool? The government, because they were owned by the big rich industrialists. Even today you see constantly in the US, companies threatening to move and politicians caving in with tax reductions or free land. And you think unions have more power or are bigger threat than companies? LOL wake the **** up!

It's hating the extortion that gets used to inflate wages that has destroyed businesses.

Yes it is much better to have workers working for so little that they cant feed their families...

 

[faithful_servant]

That was the whole foundation of Unions... that the employers were exploiting the employees and there was no one to help/talk for the employees. That is where the right started to hate unions because they were a threat to their political base, the rich business owners. Of course unions also came around at the time socialism was born as a political force, which also was a massive threat the to the status quo which was run by the conservative right.. hence the right saw the new "left" as a threat and used all sorts of methods to hit down on them, including mass murder.



Counter argument is that the corrupt organization is the company/employer who exploits the workers and bags the extra profits because of this.



Yes it is so much better to have a society as poor as Chinas or Indias, where the masses cant feed their families but hey the wages are low so that the upper classes can get stuff cheaper right?



Wait what? And companies dont? Come on they invented the freaking process. Rich landowners, usually the Church, controlled the political leadership going back 1000s of years. It is nothing new. Who do you think controlled the rise of the industrial revolution.. the workers? LOL.. who allowed the exploitation of children and women in massive factories in Liverpool? The government, because they were owned by the big rich industrialists. Even today you see constantly in the US, companies threatening to move and politicians caving in with tax reductions or free land. And you think unions have more power or are bigger threat than companies? LOL wake the **** up!



Yes it is much better to have workers working for so little that they cant feed their families...

So you entire post is predicated on two flawed arguments:
Businesses normally work to make a set profit margin. If they exceed that, they tend to cut prices to make themselves more competitive and get more of teh market share, so that they make more money by increasing volume.
... and then you use them tired crap that others have posted on this thread of "Well, big business is buying and selling politicians, so why can't unions?" One bad thing does not justify another.

 

[TobyOne]

Thats absurd. Corporations are formed to mitigate risk to the individuals who form the corporation. Its when the left tries to suppress the rights of those in a corporation that corporate interests are treated as a collective. Plus, there are many examples of unions acting in the interest of the collective at the expense of its members. Hotel unions in LA being one example.

CORPORATIONS celebrate the collective called the corporation over the rights of the individual.

Unions protect the rights of the individual when dealing with a conglomerate called a corporation. Corporations being called "individual" is laughable.

 

[gdgyva]

companies are in business to make money....plain and simple

they have no moral outlook, or need....nor should they

now the managers of the companies also know that without good employees, it is impossible to maximize the profitability of the company

so there is a fine line that is walked by them....pay enough to keep your good employees happy and productive

but not too much that the profits start to slide

unions take much of that away....it is largely a pay everyone the same type of environment with a few tweaks

so the best employees never truly get the recognition and pay they deserve, and the poorest employees are kept safe by the union

it is exactly what any company wouldnt want in their workforce.....

but exactly what unions fight for everywhere.....

that is why the sides can and will never see eye to eye.....

as a manager now for coming up on 35 years....i want the best, and i am willing to pay for the best

but i cant abide by anyone not pulling their weight

 

[PeteEU]

So you entire post is predicated on two flawed arguments:

Oh?

Businesses normally work to make a set profit margin.

In theory yes. But few companies can actually control this as the theory dictates. In reality most companies try to set profit margins they can get away with. Big pharma set massive profit margins because they can get away with it in the US..Other companies take low profit margins because of the competition in the market.. but then there are other situations where the company keeps your theoretical margins by pressing the prices down on their suppliers... this happens especially in the grocery business where milk farmers are in some places being forced by big business supermarkets to sell their products at near cost or even under cost. This can only happen if the supermarkets have cornered the market.

So it is not as black and white as you seem to think it is. Plus who pays for all this? Usually the workers, because do you really think the CEO and his goons or the owners would take a paycut .. LOL. You have banks and other companies losing billions and yet the CEO and top management still getting bonuses..

And so we are back to why unions not only exist but are needed... to keep the business owners honest.

If they exceed that, they tend to cut prices to make themselves more competitive and get more of teh market share, so that they make more money by increasing volume.

Yes that is the text book theory. Does not really work in the real world for the most part. It depends on the industry and companies. You never really see Apple cut prices do you? And have you not noticed that in the supermarket prices almost never go down? In fact if you look at a Mars bar.... they use to be bigger but they still cost the same. There are many tricks that companies use to screw over consumers and their workers and that is why we need unions and consumer protection agencies because companies and their owners cant be trusted to contain their greed... Time and time again if a company and its owners are not held in check, then they will exploit people.... it is a fact.

... and then you use them tired crap that others have posted on this thread of "Well, big business is buying and selling politicians, so why can't unions?" One bad thing does not justify another.

No one thing does not justify the other, but as one of the main arguments against Unions from the American right, is the fact they buy politicians and yet companies do it far more than unions... and no bitching about that? Congress is pretty much controlled by big business and not the unions. Almost all pieces business legislation is either written by big business or tailored directly for them. Consumer protection comes second if at all.

 

[DVSentinel]

It's Interesting the dislike of unions. I support them simply because your choosing between the worker or the business owners and executives. Can you come up with any reason you support corporations over their workers. You do know that the wages of the workers haven't gone up on average for 30 years with production increase of over 80% in that time period . The fact is that it has showed up in corporate profits and not in wages. The corporate heads have seen massive increase in their wages and wealth in that same time period. And the discrepancy in wealth in this country has only one other time that compares to know and that is right before the great depression. If your dislike of unions is because of their evils , you have no case because business history puts unions on the back burner compared to the evils of business historically. What I'm most amazed about is how so many on the right are voting against their best interest.

From Marx. He describes unions as a way for the "proletariat" to take control from the ruling/"rich" class. History also shows us how poor economies become when the "workers" have a say in what a company does.

Bottom line, Marx promoted it, Therefore, it is absolute evil and should be fought against will all achievable force.

 

[Jack Hays]

CORPORATIONS celebrate the collective called the corporation over the rights of the individual.

Unions protect the rights of the individual when dealing with a conglomerate called a corporation. Corporations being called "individual" is laughable.

I don't call corporations anything. I'm under no obligation to work for one, but if I do then I do so as an individual.

 

[JumpinJack]

I don't call corporations anything. I'm under no obligation to work for one, but if I do then I do so as an individual.

When you say you prefer the rights of the individual, you mean rights of corporations. Individuals have very little power against corporations. History has shown that without laws and unions, people would be worked to death, literally. Including children. That's the history in our country. Laws and unions arose because of the extreme abuse of employees by corporations. They arose from a need.

Unions help protect individuals, by gathering those workers with commonality, for a common goal. Much as corporation officers group together for a common goal.

 

[JumpinJack]

Thats absurd. Corporations are formed to mitigate risk to the individuals who form the corporation. Its when the left tries to suppress the rights of those in a corporation that corporate interests are treated as a collective. Plus, there are many examples of unions acting in the interest of the collective at the expense of its members. Hotel unions in LA being one example.

Yeah, right. Exxon is all about John Doe, V.P., in the San Francisco office. (not) Mr. Doe is merely a cog in the wheel of Exxon. All parts of the wheel operate in unison for the corporation, whose sole goal is to make a profit. Nothing wrong with that. But mitigating risks to individuals is not part of Exxon's business plan. Do the top dogs get rich? Yes, they do.

An individual has no power up against a corporation. Unions help protect that individual. Unions arose from a need for that protection. American history has shown that corporations will do some pretty awful things to make a buck. Even these days (the BP spill is an example). Workers lost body parts from dangerous equipment without safety guards, from coal dust so thick you couldn't see your hand in front of your face. Workers lost their lives when locked into factories all day. Children lost their lives and their childhoods from being forced to work dawn to dusk. Workers were almost serfs in some situations, when corporations required the workers live in company-owned shacks at high rents, and buy all their household needs and food from company-owned stores, at high cost. The cost of living was so high, and the pay so poor, that the workers were never able to leave their employment, since that wasn't allowed unless they could pay off their rent and store debts, which wasn't possible because of the poor pay. American ingenuity being what it is, the workers eventually grouped together and demanded better working conditions and pay....in a union. It's a shame that's what it took. You'd think corporations would treat people fairly. But they don't, if they don't have to. And if Corporation A does it, then Corporation B must do the same to stay competitive.

The song "Sixteen Tons" is about the serf-like working conditions in the coal industry:

You load sixteen tons, what do you get?
Another day older and deeper in debt
Saint Peter don't you call me 'cause I can't go
I owe my soul to the company store

He owes his soul to the company store.....he can't leave because he's indebted to the company for his living expenses. And the company worked it so that he'd never get paid enough to pay off his debt.

 

[Neomalthusian]

Those corporations would be the same wonderful corporations who refused to hire women and blacks and other non-whites and non-males, and who paid women a fraction of what they paid men for the exact same jobs. THOSE corporations?

Most corporations give raises, without having a union involved. But they are smaller than they would be otherwise, are doled out to favorites often, and there is secrecy about who gets what raise....secrecy for a reason. How many times has any of us known someone who was a schmoocher who didn't have the best skills and wasn't the hardest worker, but who got the same raise as the workhorses? That's what goes on at corporations. Unions take away all that unfairness to a large extent. And everyone knows upfront, since it's in the Collective Bargaining Agreement, that women are getting paid the same.

The corporations have all the power over the individual employees. Unions even things out somewhat. How many corporations freeze wages in bad times, cut benefits, have layoffs, and then fund an expensive retreat for the V.P.'s? Mine did. Oh, the retreat was to "discuss business." But what they did was drink, fly first class, eat thick steaks, and party, when they could have gotten more work done by staying in the office and having a meeting. Unions are the first to call out such unfairness and untruth.

If corporations treated their employees fairly, there would be no unions. If you saw the movie "Norma Rae," you saw how difficult it was to get workers to vote for a union. They could lose their jobs, and they don't want to be so confrontational or troublemaking. It's only when driven by extreme unfairness that workers will vote to form, or join, a union.

So, yes, you got a merit raise. Or did you? How do you know? Because they said it was based on merit? How do you know that Joe Schlep down the hall, who misses work so often that you thought he was part time, didn't get a bigger raise? If he did, were the raises really on merit? How was Lily Ledbetter to know that she was underpaid for decades, compared to her male coworkers? She didn't. Now there is the Lily Ledbetter Act, since she was denied backpay because (get this)....because she only had a certain time to sue for that, which had expired, and she didn't know before then because of the secrecy. She THOUGHT she was paid the same. NOW...the statute of limitations runs from the time a woman learns that she was illegally paid less than her male coworkers.

Most unionism is in the public sector. Messing with corporations (especially those who compete fiercely on price) is a small and continually shrinking aspect of what unions do or care to do.

Kind of tiresome how many people ignorantly pretend unionism is all about pushing back against those for profit corporations.

I am for unions because I love individual liberty.

What a joke.

And that's what a corporation is! There's nothing whatsoever "individual" about corporations.

Unions help protect the rights of the individual, when dealing with a collective, who holds all the cards, and as history has shown, will drive its employees into the ground, if allowed to.

Why is unionism wildly more prevalent in public sectors than private sectors? History has not shown public sector workers being "driven into the ground."

The FIVE MOST heavily unionized sectors are municipal government, state government, federal government, education, and utilities. So stop playing pretend.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Jack Hays]

When you say you prefer the rights of the individual, you mean rights of corporations. Individuals have very little power against corporations. History has shown that without laws and unions, people would be worked to death, literally. Including children. That's the history in our country. Laws and unions arose because of the extreme abuse of employees by corporations. They arose from a need.

Unions help protect individuals, by gathering those workers with commonality, for a common goal. Much as corporation officers group together for a common goal.

I don't care at all about your view of corporations. As for laws, those are our proper recourse to govern behavior.

 

[JumpinJack]

Most unionism is in the public sector. Messing with corporations (especially those who compete fiercely on price) is a small and continually shrinking aspect of what unions do or care to do.

Kind of tiresome how many people ignorantly pretend unionism is all about pushing back against those for profit corporations.



What a joke.



Why is unionism wildly more prevalent in public sectors than private sectors? History has not shown public sector workers being "driven into the ground."

The FIVE MOST heavily unionized sectors are municipal government, state government, federal government, education, and utilities. So stop playing pretend.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Unions didn't start with the public sector. They expanded into them, which makes sense, since it's easier to start a public sector union, unions help protect individual rights. It's a good thing to have an organization a worker can turn to, in the event of a safety concern or wage issue. Without a union, the corporations hold all the power in the relationship.

The danger of fire in factories like the Triangle Shirtwaist was well-known, but high levels of corruption in both the garment industry and city government generally ensured that no useful precautions were taken to prevent fires. Blanck and Harris already had a suspicious history of factory fires. The Triangle factory was twice scorched in 1902, while their Diamond Waist Company factory burned twice, in 1907 and in 1910. It seems that Blanck and Harris deliberately torched their workplaces before business hours in order to collect on the large fire-insurance policies they purchased, a not uncommon practice in the early 20th century. While this was not the cause of the 1911 fire, it contributed to the tragedy, as Blanck and Harris refused to install sprinkler systems and take other safety measures in case they needed to burn down their shops again.

Added to this delinquency were Blanck and Harris’ notorious anti-worker policies. Their employees were paid a mere $15 a week, despite working 12 hours a day, every day. When the International Ladies Garment Workers Union led a strike in 1909 demanding higher pay and shorter and more predictable hours, Blanck and Harris’ company was one of the few manufacturers who resisted, hiring police as thugs to imprison the striking women, and paying off politicians to look the other way.

On March 25, a Saturday afternoon, there were 600 workers at the factory when a fire began in a rag bin. The manager attempted to use the fire hose to extinguish it, but was unsuccessful, as the hose was rotted and its valve was rusted shut. As the fire grew, panic ensued. The young workers tried to exit the building by the elevator but it could hold only 12 people and the operator was able to make just four trips back and forth before it broke down amid the heat and flames. In a desperate attempt to escape the fire, the girls left behind waiting for the elevator plunged down the shaft to their deaths. The girls who fled via the stairwells also met awful demises–when they found a locked door at the bottom of the stairs, many were burned alive.

Those workers who were on floors above the fire, including the owners, escaped to the roof and then to adjoining buildings. As firefighters arrived, they witnessed a horrible scene. The girls who did not make it to the stairwells or the elevator were trapped by the fire inside the factory and began to jump from the windows to escape it. The bodies of the jumpers fell on the fire hoses, making it difficult to begin fighting the fire. Also, the firefighters ladders reached only seven floors high and the fire was on the eighth floor. In one case, a life net was unfurled to catch jumpers, but three girls jumped at the same time, ripping the net. The nets turned out to be mostly ineffectual.

Within 18 minutes, it was all over. Forty-nine workers had burned to death or been suffocated by smoke, 36 were dead in the elevator shaft and 58 died from jumping to the sidewalks. With two more dying later from their injuries, a total of 145 people were killed by the fire. The workers union set up a march on April 5 on New York’s Fifth Avenue to protest the conditions that had led to the fire; it was attended by 80,000 people.

 

[Neomalthusian]

Unions didn't start with the public sector.

Well that's where they are now,
predominantly, which relegates your ramblings about corporations to prattle.

They expanded into them, which makes sense, since it's easier to start a public sector union, unions help protect individual rights.

Unions have nothing whatsoever to do with anyone's individual rights.

It's a good thing to have an organization a worker can turn to, in the event of a safety concern or wage issue. Without a union, the corporations hold all the power in the relationship.

And again you shift back to corporations, after having been corrected. Do you even know what "public sector" means?

 

[JumpinJack]

Well that's where they are now,
predominantly, which relegates your ramblings about corporations to prattle.



Unions have nothing whatsoever to do with anyone's individual rights.



And again you shift back to corporations, after having been corrected. Do you even know what "public sector" means?

Unions ARE about the individual's rights. An individual has NO power in a relationship with a corporation. Unions help protect the individual's rights when faced when attempted abuse by corporations. Our country's history shows for a fact that corporations will push the abuse to the point of death of workers, if necessary, with no regard for the health, welfare, prosperity, or fairness to its employees.

Get down on your knees and thank unions for your 40 hour work week, your insurance benefits, your retirement plan by your employer, your personal days' off, your paid vacation. You have all that and more because of unions and for no other reason. It certainly wasn't because of the goodness of the corporate heart. Corporations don't have hearts; they're not people.

 

[Neomalthusian]

Unions ARE about the individual's rights. An individual has NO power in a relationship with a corporation.

Both sentences 100% false, in all cases.

Unions help protect the individual's rights when faced when attempted abuse by corporations.

The public sector is not corporate or for-profit, but that's where we find the highest rates of unionism.

Why do you keep reverting back to corporations when most unionism is public sector? Do you not know what the public sector is? Do you need me to tell you what it is?

 

[lpast]

It's Interesting the dislike of unions. I support them simply because your choosing between the worker or the business owners and executives. Can you come up with any reason you support corporations over their workers. You do know that the wages of the workers haven't gone up on average for 30 years with production increase of over 80% in that time period . The fact is that it has showed up in corporate profits and not in wages. The corporate heads have seen massive increase in their wages and wealth in that same time period. And the discrepancy in wealth in this country has only one other time that compares to know and that is right before the great depression. If your dislike of unions is because of their evils , you have no case because business history puts unions on the back burner compared to the evils of business historically. What I'm most amazed about is how so many on the right are voting against their best interest.

I realize im late to this thread but I agree with you wholeheartedly. Scott Walker was deemed a Hero for screwing over workers in wisc. He was hailed as hero of conservatism and he was the first one to drop out of the presidential GOP primary for lack of any support. Thats not liberals or democrats rejecting him. It was his own party, the same with Chris Christy his home state favorability is in the toilet and his presidential aspirations were crushed.

Thats why trump is doing so well and spanking the traditional Gop. Most republicans are working class americans and the gop consistently votes against them and for big corps and big money.

How can they justify voting NO with the excuse we cant afford it to continuing unemployment for out of work workers and then fight mightily to keep millions in subsidies for industries that have never lost a single quarter. Big Oil, Big Pharmaceuticals and Big Corporate Farms.

They need to take this election as a lesson going forward and start getting on the side of the working class.
The super rich in this country dont need any help.

 

[lpast]

Both sentences 100% false, in all cases.



The public sector is not corporate or for-profit, but that's where we find the highest rates of unionism.

Why do you keep reverting back to corporations when most unionism is public sector? Do you not know what the public sector is? Do you need me to tell you what it is?

The public sector is the only working americans that are making a fair wage and thats why the koch bros fully funded Scott Walkers rape of the working class in Wisc. It backfired, it cost him the election and it cost the Koch Bros in the 100s of millions in pac cash for failed candidates.

Corporate america wants to destroy and vestige of decent paying jobs and to do that they have to destroy unions first.

Trump is as popular as he is because he talked to the working class. Something the GOP candidates did not nor, the democrat candidates. He said we need TARIFFS on any chinese imports and we need to stop the rape of our border that in effect dilutes the work force and puts downward pressure on wages.

Ronald Reagan raised import tariffs on all imported motorcycles 10 times the amount, to save Harley Davidson, it not only saved harley davidson it didnt stop a single motorcycle from being imported.

There was a 1500 per vehicle import tariff put on all imported vehicles to save Detroit. It worked and what happened ? Foriegn auto makers opened plants in america and created thousands of jobs for americans.

We need a huge tariff on all OUTSOURCED Corporations who idled american workers then want to import their foriegn goods here FOR FREE to their biggest consumer market.

The rich dont need any help or any protection in america, they are the villains and they are milking the country dry

 

[Neomalthusian]

The public sector is the only working americans that are making a fair wage

And that's bull****.

Corporate america wants to destroy and vestige of decent paying jobs and to do that they have to destroy unions first.

And immediately you pivot back to "corporate America." Unionism is more concentrated in the public sector. Corporations are private sector.

(Trump/Reagan prattle deleted for irrelevance)

The rich dont need any help or any protection in america,

This thread isn't about "the rich" either. It's about labor cartels. Labor cartels are coercive monopolies. Right To Work takes away unions' monopoly privilege.

 

[ocean515]

It's Interesting the dislike of unions. I support them simply because your choosing between the worker or the business owners and executives. Can you come up with any reason you support corporations over their workers. You do know that the wages of the workers haven't gone up on average for 30 years with production increase of over 80% in that time period . The fact is that it has showed up in corporate profits and not in wages. The corporate heads have seen massive increase in their wages and wealth in that same time period. And the discrepancy in wealth in this country has only one other time that compares to know and that is right before the great depression. If your dislike of unions is because of their evils , you have no case because business history puts unions on the back burner compared to the evils of business historically. What I'm most amazed about is how so many on the right are voting against their best interest.

Well, I suppose the destruction of the steel industry, ship building industry, as well as other manufacturing industries, along with significant damage to the automobile industry is difficult for many to ignore.

Throw in the incredible harm public employee unions have caused in cities and states across the US, and it's difficult to find good things to like about their self centered actions.

It would be nice if the radical left instructed their minions to use more accurate words besides "hate" to propagandize their minds with.

 

[lpast]

And that's bull****.



And immediately you pivot back to "corporate America." Unionism is more concentrated in the public sector. Corporations are private sector.

(Trump/Reagan prattle deleted for irrelevance)



This thread isn't about "the rich" either. It's about labor cartels. Labor cartels are coercive monopolies. Right To Work takes away unions' monopoly privilege.

Merely telling me one of my statements is BS is well just BS tell me why.

Unions were started in the private sector and they were started because companies hired thugs to beat employees and keep them in line. Goiing back employers were killing workers by refusing to give them a safe place to work. Working 12 yr old girls 12 hours a day when there were no labor laws.

The triangle shirtwaist factory fire in NYC 146 workers died because the owners locked the exit doors so employees couldnt go out and smoke. A fire started and they WERE LOCKED IN the building was a tinderbox ill mainted and a big coffin.

When workers had enough they started to push back against the companies and the companies sent out thugs to deter them. Now this is how the mafia got involved in Unions. The workers were scared and intimidated by the hired thugs under the guise of company security. Organized crime had many working class people and their families were working class. They started putting the company thugs in intensive care and coffins. Suddenly it was the thugs that were scared and intimidated by the organized crime and workers combined. The workers were grateful. Then unions started and organized crime controlled them. BUT!!! wages increased, benefits increased, labor laws were written to protect workers and physical plants began being inspected for safety. The result was the organized criminal companies had to follow the law.

Lets understand this private sector unions have been diminished by outsourcing not by anything else.
Only a stone cold jackass would want to do the same job for less with no pensions and benefits and there was no one ranting I WANT LESS MONEY.

Look everyone has their own opinion and thats fine. No one should work and qualify for food stamps like walmart and mc donalds workers. Corps have destroyed the quality of life for americans, if not by outsourcing then by making everything part time so they can save a few bucks and the workers cant afford to live.

Trump being as popular as he is has alot to do with working middle class america who have been decimated by outsourcing and part time work. There will eventually be an american worker push back that will make politicians change their tune.

 

[Neomalthusian]

Merely telling me one of my statements is BS is well just BS tell me why.

The idea that no private sector work compensates fairly is bogus on its face. It shouldn't require more of an explanation.

Unions were started in the private sector and they were started because companies hired thugs to beat employees and keep them in line. Goiing back employers were killing workers by refusing to give them a safe place to work. Working 12 yr old girls 12 hours a day when there were no labor laws.

No matter how noble the original purpose once upon a time or how terrible the treatment by some employers back then, it doesn't legitimize modern labor cartels, least of all in the public sector.

Lets understand this private sector unions have been diminished by outsourcing not by anything else.
Only a stone cold jackass would want to do the same job for less with no pensions and benefits and there was no one ranting I WANT LESS MONEY.

Look everyone has their own opinion and thats fine. No one should work and qualify for food stamps like walmart and mc donalds workers. Corps have destroyed the quality of life for americans, if not by outsourcing then by making everything part time so they can save a few bucks and the workers cant afford to live.

You're still pivoting back to the private sector and corporations.

The five most unionized sectors of our economy, BY FAR, are federal, state and municipal government, education , and utilities. No one in those sectors scores big profits by underpaying and mistreating employees or outsourcing their work. Unions predominate here not because employment in these sectors is or ever was particularly bad or oppressive. It's because public sector entities are natural monopolies, they don't compete with other entities to offer things customers can choose to buy or not buy. They just levy taxes and set rates that customers have to pay. They aren't subject to any of the types of competition that keeps private sector waste and inefficiency in check. Unions need a monopolistic environment and coercive monopoly privileges to even exist long-term.