Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Reggie on May 18, 2010 at 12:44pm

I think we call this socialized capitalism, but I prefer the term ethical capitalism.

I'm game for that. Capitalism isn;t all bad and there are aspects it brings to the table that no other system does. Unions, unfortunately, have served their purpose and are no longer relevant. As their power wanes, they may again be needed, but as of now they do more harm than good.

I was a Union member for almost 15 years and I saw how corrupt my union was. Our Union president even was charged with crimes related to use of union funds and resources to build him a large house. He was, I kid you not, given house arrest as his punishment. The union also gave him a brand new car for his troubles of resigning in disgrace. Of course, the union was made up of his cronies who made at least twice the wage of the workers they represented and they were in bed with the companies that they were paid to protect us from.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Mario Rodgers on May 18, 2010 at 12:48pm

Oy vey. That's bad.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Reggie on May 18, 2010 at 1:08pm

Yeah, being a union member turned me anti-union (at least against it's current form).

But something else the union did to me that is on the same token of enabling and protecting the unproductive workers, it inhibited productive workers from advancing anywhere. We were all stabled together and the only way out was to marry somebody at Corporate or be related to someone in upper management.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jānis Ķimsis on May 18, 2010 at 1:37pm

I don't know about USA, but in Latvia we have multiple kinds of wages. The example you give, making widgets, would most of the time be classified as quantity work, meaning that you are paid per item made. There isn't any law saying that the employer has to classify it as such, but it is both more profitable for the employer and fairer for Joe Hardworker.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Gaytor on May 18, 2010 at 2:54pm

i've been a member of three unions and none of them were protectionist. You could be fired at any time for cause and I've never seen a strike or slow down because of a legitimate firing. When I was an Iron Worker we called these guys L.U.M.s (Lazy Unwanted Motherfuckers). When I was young in the trade I became a foreman quickly. I knew what I needed to do to make money. If I had someone holding me back, I I would make them carry rebar with me until they quit. It's how the industry is.

Protectionist unions like Boeing Machinists are a old relic that needs revamping. A guy running a robot for GM can be taught to do the same for Boeing and vice versa. They need a referral union agreement. Guys are taught skills and the business can hire based on these skills and need. When the work is completed the company can cut them and move to the next task. For this a minimum wage is set, and not a maximum. When a person can't cut their weight, they are gone. It gives more opportunities for the employee and the company.

The idea that in a labor position you are going to be able to negotiate a higher wage for doing more work by a substantial amount doesn't bear out. If you really want more and to earn what you are worth, working for yourself is the way.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Gaytor on May 21, 2010 at 9:57am

He couldn't stop repeating himself. It was tough to watch. I watched it live and I don't recall him flat out saying, "Look, if a business doesn't want any black folk in, it's their property, they should have that right." That's really what the Libertarian/pure capitalist would say. Instead he danced, refused to answer yes or no... Sir, if you are embarrassed to say what you really think, maybe it's because there is something wrong with the thought?
It would clearly be a greater ill to allow segregation than it is to step on pure capitalism and say no, if you want to do business here, it's within our constraints as we the people are the licensor.

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page