S
SamH
Guest
They should be fired. I know if I call in sick I had better not be seen on the news marching in a protest - and I own part of the company.
- Status
P
pismopal
Guest
And what about the huge percentage…the majority of American workers who get along without unions? I can answer the question…they do fine and they have the added bonus of knowing that they don’t have to pay dues to a union which uses their dues to bribe politicians ( mostly Democrat ). Look at all the cities…counties and states with the heaviest union activity( and the most Democrat voters and activity) and political support for unions. Are they in trouble with their budgets? Does this not ring some kind of a bell…or am I deaf?
P
pismopal
Guest
PS and the non union worker does not seem to put their employers out of business with their unreasonable and unrealistic demands…I offer General Motors as an example. A fine iconic American company bankrupt because they co towed to unions.
A
Annabelle_Marie
Guest
Because the Govenor wants nothing less than his FULL proposal…limiting the unions to collectivly bargain on benefits and limiting them to only collectively bargain on wage increases in the future that are BELOW inflation.
and he ain’t playing anything less then that. I’m sure so in the future he can kick them even more. Less money there means more of his pet projects…
O
oldcelt
Guest
Remember…bargaining is precisely that…if you don’t agree…no deal.
This from a former steward who won some, and lost some.
John
M
ManOnFire
Guest
12% of the workforce is unionized. Federal, state and local govts are bankrupt. What would happen if the other 88% of the workforce were to demand union pay raises, better benefits, higher pensions? More jobs would go to China faster until the US defaults on loans and democracy ceases to exist. The end.
O
oldcelt
Guest
Workers, union or not, demand nothing…they bargain. Your question has been answered.
John
C
CMatt25
Guest
It’s no wonder 61% in the USA Today/Gallop poll support collective bargaining and only 33% oppose when the American people see the unions compromising and Walker not.
A
a_priori
Guest
Very well said. This is indeed the higher point. If people think that public employees are metaphysically entitled beyond the capacity to pay them, something will give. America is running toward the cliff with her fingers in her ears. Most people alive today know nothing of sacrifice. Having this standard of living is just like breathing air. It’s never not been there so it always will be.
If the pro-union activists and those who support them have their way (along with the unbridled greed and taxpayer bailouts of Wall Street) , we will be a grease spot on the floor of the chasm. Want to support the entitlement mentality? Then when the checks bounce and the “lights go out”, look in the mirror and thank yourself.
C
ChadS
Guest
Higher wages support more affluent lifestyles. Unions typically bring their members the wages that can afford them certain luxuries. The effects of these high wages have a trickle down effect across a wide section of the economy. A higher paid union worker can afford a new car instead of a used one, they can replace household items when needed instead of trying to make do or get by without one. They can take their families on vacations once a year, maybe they’ll eat out once or twice a month instead of once or twice a year.
All of these activities cost money and when money is spent others can remain employed. So if a worker buys a five year old used car it does absolutely nothing for the auto industry (they made their money years earlier), it probably doesn’t do much for the dealership either considering more money can be made on new cars.
Shipping jobs overseas has absolutely no benefit for the consumer. Did a $15 shirt made in America cost significantly less after Chinese laborers making $.35 an hour made the shirt instead of a union worker in North Carolina? I don’t think it did, the only thing that increased was the profit margin on the shirt.
Most of the money union workers make gets put back into the economy in one way or another. They aren’t raking in money by the truckload off of dividends. They hope they have enough to help pay for college or any repairs to the house or to have a few nicer things to enjoy.
A lot of people I know would willingly pay a few bucks more for something American made rather than imported. They would rather know they are supporting American workers rather than somebody overseas. If these jobs came back to these towns then you’d see all the shuttered diners re-opening, maybe some new shops in all the abandoned storefronts, maybe homes that needed new siding would have it replace or sidewalks repaired.
Sure one worker can’t stimulate the economy much, but in a town a 1,000 workers could do a lot and across states and regions and the country as a whole the effect would be tremendous.
Lowering wages of employees won’t make a difference, if anything it makes people tighten their belt more and go into austerity mode. Higher wages helps the economy more than stripping people of benefits and wages does. It’s just Econ 101.
ChadS
A
a_priori
Guest
You’re right about that. Trickle down indeed. Unions make demands regarding pay and benefits. That money doesn’t come to the ground strapped to an incoming meteorite. Governments have to borrow to pay those workers so they can “stimulate” the economy. Someone will have to pay that debt back. Your argument is tantamount to ripping up your hardwood floors so you can feed the woodstove and heat your house for a week. Eventually you’ll run out of hardwood floor and your house will grow cold in the end because you couldn’t see the future while enjoying the luxurious warmth that you felt entitled to.
I
iamrefreshed
Guest
I’m guessing you either did not take economics or you slept through class?
E
estesbob
Guest
Walker supports collective bargaining also.
B
bbarrick8383
Guest
P
pismopal
Guest
Even though your analogy is perfect…easy to understand and illustrative…some will not get it because they refuse to “get it”. Basic math…the 6th grade stuff…eludes many:shrug:
C
ChadS
Guest
My argument is that when people work and have good wages they spend money and put it into the economy and that in turn drives demand for goods which allows others to work.
I didn’t realize this idea was offensive or one that doesn’t need to be taken seriously.
I suppose with your way of thinking you won’t need to rip up the floors to heat the house, but then again you won’t have a house to heat so what’s it matter?
ChadS
A
a_priori
Guest
The money that you want to put into the economy has to come from somewhere. If it doesn’t come from savings and thrift, it is unsustainable. If we would accept a slightly lower standard of living and if people who received assistance would contribute more for what they get, this could be sustained long term. But the immediacy and gratification of spending now always trumps abstract future consequences. Then we talk ourselves into thinking there will be no long term consequences. People who reassure us in this way get elected.
You can borrow money from “Vinny” to finance a lavish lifestyle. You can spread it around and make everyone very happy as you all enjoy a wonderful time. Unless you can produce what it takes to keep Vinny happy and service your debt, a black limo will pull up to your door one day and take you on a picnic in Jersey.
Live within your means as a person, city, state or nation and you will endure. Live beyond your means, meet Vinny.
Buy a smaller house you can afford and there won’t be a problem.
C
ChadS
Guest
I think maybe I’m being misunderstood here. In this country something has to be done to attract businesses back to all parts of the country. It would be great if businesses that went overseas for manufacturing could be enticed to come back. It would be great if you called an American operated company and got somebody living and working in America and not a phone call that goes 3/4 of the way around the earth before it’s answered.
Strong and healthy companies can afford to pay workers more and that benefits everybody. I think unions can be a definite part of this equation, but I wonder if some of the problem itself isn’t the collective bargaining process itself. It seems that everybody plays their cards close to their vest and they don’t want to let on the true picture of the situation or let on any idea of what their strategy is.
Living within our means is great and governments as well as ordinary people should strive to do that as much as possible, but we also need to ensure we have a strong economy to make living within out means even possible.
ChadS
M
ManOnFire
Guest
Govt. bankruptcy will lead to socialism or Marxism. It’s Econ 100. Printing more money to artificially inflate ourselves out of the problem is not real, yet it’s the fastest and least labor-intensive way to make the numbers look impressive. Too bad it’s not working. Inflation will send more jobs to China when our labor rates are artificially higher.
O
oldcelt
Guest
Respond to JPII and Solidarity…Gdansk, etc…our Pope at the time backed it all in his home country. We’ll talk more later if you keep up this nonsense.
John
John
- Status