I understand where you are coming from. My grandfather was president of ILWU, but even sometimes he thinks the unions have lost their way. My father belongs to the CA teacher’s union, and while it is not for me (I like the ides of achieving at my own merit, not because of the union, but I also realize this is not a value to everyone), I believe it plays an important role for workers who are not able to defend themselves. Not everyone (myself included!) can be a tough negotiator.
I do believe in limited regulations. Like most free market economists affirm, even in a free market the government would enforce laws against fraud, contract violations, theft, and murder, etc. This is where unions can be a positive for workers in a free market. Because most unions (if not all) operate on contracts, violations of this contract would be enforcable by government, unlike at-will workers who have limited rights. Therefore, unions help working men get assured wages as much as possible, ensuring social justice for families. The government need not a play a large role here. The use of government troops and policemen against unions in the last century was clearly wrong and unjust, and clearly not in the government’s power to do. Just as I do not believe the government should stop unions, so too should they not help. Working men united are strong. If the government gets more involved than this (minimum wages, workplace laws, etc.) than it only harms the economic well being of all, to fix what has proven to be exceptional situations. One-size-fits-all laws, and that is the only kind of law, necessarily harm the worker and all members of society, to their detriment.
That being said, I see way too many union leaders who are proud that they help substandard or flat out lousy workers keep their job. My father was the teacher union rep and had prided himself on helping an awful teacher, who did nothing but smoke at the classroom door, keep his job at taxpayer expense!!!
This harms productivity and, in the long wrong, the company and his fellow workers.
The government should clearly NOT be enforcing laws for big corporations, but I guess since it is owned by them they must do their bosses’ will!
We all know the story: military adventures in Central America for United Fruit Co. shameful taking of Hawaii for Dole pineapple interests, Middle Eastern influences for oil interest, strong-arming China and Japan to artificially weaken their currencies, etc. Has not our military adventuring been making the world safe for big corporations? The example you give of the American dollar was a cogent one, because once upon a time not only were we able to improve local people’s live without government interference, we also helped feed the world with our excesses. Not enough space here to explain why that no longer is, but we did once do the things you say. The government did not do it, private investors did. They knew a happy, healthy population was better for long term growth. Now its all about making a quick buck.
Again, if the we released GM and the others from the onerous conditions we place on their shoulders, I have no doubt they would pull themselves together. But greater government investment, like they are trying now, and mark my words in 5 years they will be like MG and the other British junk cars of the nationalized era, and will still eventually fail. Nothing, not even endless cash, replaces consumer demand.
As for the jerks in Washington, it is silly to demand we trade with countries. If they want our goods we will sell, and if we want their’s we will buy. What a silly notion Washington has invented that we can aritificially “create demand” on a nation’s goods and services. Maybe if we stopped doing that there might be less exploitation by countries pressured to trade and perform!
Look forward to you post!
