"Unions are Evil" - Page 8

tylerdurden · #71 11-04-2005, 10:34 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Ah, you made my point.

A post outlining sob story of a union member is ended with how corrupt unions are.

When the story is about a corporate sob story, we get talking points.

[/ QUOTE ]

Pointing out that Ken Lay would have been a "pal" of anyone that happened to be in the white house is a talking point? Are there lots of spin doctors up there in washington trying to show how there's no difference between Democrats and Republicans?

Here, I'll fix your post:

"Oh, you pointed out that my flimsy argument has no substance. Talking points are lame."

tylerdurden · #72 11-04-2005, 10:39 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The point is that they would be better off without the union. Why? Because they are skilled, non-lazy workers.

[/ QUOTE ]

So, what is the problem with my facile argument. If they are skilled then they should quit.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's the same as the "if you don't like paying taxes, move to somalia" argument.

Let's say local government decides to levy a $0.01 tax on gasoline, and the tax goes directly towards the governor's son's ferrari fund.

Will I go out of state to avoid the extra $0.01 tax? No. Am I harmed by it? Yes. Even though I'm harmed, it's still better to pay the extra 0.01/gal than to travel out of state to avoid it.

Saying that I should just move to another state ignores my property rights. Even if we take that out of consideration, moving is likely a greater expense than I will pay in Ferrari Fund gas taxes, so I won't move anyway.

Therefore, according to your argument, the tax is justifiable and I should just shut up and pay it, right?

Easy E · #73 11-04-2005, 11:07 AM

Unions are a bad deal for the union members. The union, like any organization, eventually evolves to the point where its only purpose is to further *itself* as an entity.

Could the same charge be leveled at a corporation?

tylerdurden · #74 11-04-2005, 01:04 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Unions are a bad deal for the union members. The union, like any organization, eventually evolves to the point where its only purpose is to further *itself* as an entity.

Could the same charge be leveled at a corporation?

[/ QUOTE ]

Not really. A corporation will liquidate or let itself be bought out if that maximizes shareholder value.

Cyrus · #75 11-04-2005, 03:56 PM

You folks need to stock up on your history, man.

[ QUOTE ]
Come all you good workers,
Good news to you I'll tell
Of how the good old union
Has come in here to dwell.
 . 
CHORUS:
Which side are you on?
Which side are you on?
Which side are you on?
Which side are you on?
 . 
My dady was a miner,
And I'm a miner's son,
And I'll stick with the union
'Til every battle's won.
 . 
They say in Harlan County
There are no neutrals there.
You'll either be a union man
Or a thug for J. H. Blair.
CHORUS:
Which side are you on?
Which side are you on?
Which side are you on?
Which side are you on?
 . 
Oh workers can you stand it?
Oh tell me how you can?
Will you be a lousy scab
Or will you be a man?
 . 
Don't scab for the bosses,
Don't listen to their lies.
Us poor folks haven't got a chance
Unless we organize.
CHORUS:
Which side are you on?
Which side are you on?
Which side are you on?
Which side are you on?

[/ QUOTE ]

Cyrus · #76 11-04-2005, 05:09 PM

I'm kinda waiting for the honorable poster Adios to offer, once more, his valuable insight on the matter of unions. Especially his familial experience.

ACPlayer · #77 11-04-2005, 11:06 PM

I have personally managed trade show booths at McCormick, Moscone and other convention halls. The value is there so I buy the service. Just like I have bought Microsoft software for my company's computers since 1985 paying exhorbitant prices for utter crap (for those who dont know OS/2 was a better OS as was Apple at that time but MS muscled the market big time) in some cases but realizing that the value was there. I had no chance to negotiate the price of MS Office or Windows 95 etc.

However, I also bought MS stock. Which of course helped. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

ACPlayer · #78 11-04-2005, 11:11 PM

[ QUOTE ]
It's the same as the "if you don't like paying taxes, move to somalia" argument.

[/ QUOTE ]

And it is a great argument. Every year thousands move to America and are happy for a chance to pay taxes because they know that the American infrastructure will provide them an opportunity to make lots of money.

Of course, the very rich do move to some tax haven or the other.

[ QUOTE ]
Let's say local government decides to levy a $0.01 tax on gasoline, and the tax goes directly towards the governor's son's ferrari fund.

[/ QUOTE ]

But of course you fire the bum the next chance you get. Union members elect their leaders in elections. If they dont like it, if it is not adding value to their lives, if the EV for them to continue to pay union fees is not there -- then move.

However, for the free market types, it seems that unions business practices are bad but the same practices when done by companies are just fine.

tylerdurden · #79 11-05-2005, 12:21 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Let's say local government decides to levy a $0.01 tax on gasoline, and the tax goes directly towards the governor's son's ferrari fund.

[/ QUOTE ]

But of course you fire the bum the next chance you get.

[/ QUOTE ]

So in the meantime, he's justified in pillaging as much as he can?

[ QUOTE ]
Union members elect their leaders in elections. If they dont like it, if it is not adding value to their lives, if the EV for them to continue to pay union fees is not there -- then move.

However, for the free market types, it seems that unions business practices are bad but the same practices when done by companies are just fine.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not at all. I am eager to object to corporations that coopt government power to force people to do business with them on unfavorable terms.

See if you can tell the difference in these scenarios:

1) I have a supply of hot dogs. The next town over, 100 miles away, has a vibrant hot dog market, with multiple suppliers, multiple vendors, and multiple buyers. Hot dogs in that market generally go for about $1 retail to consumers.

In my town, due to a series of coincidences, there are no hot dog suppliers or vendors. People have to drive to the next town if they want a hot dog.

People find out that I have some hot dogs, and ask me to sell them. I decide that I can let them go for $3 each. Some people will decide that it's worth paying $2 extra instead of driving to the next town. They would prefer to pay $1, but they don't mind paying $3. Some other people continue to drive to the next town to save the $2.

2) Same scenario, but now I'm employing thugs to break kneecaps of people that try to bring hotdogs into my market. People still buy my $3 hot dogs. They obviously find value in my $3 hotdogs, so my thuggery must be justifiable, right?

3) same as scenario 1, execpt there is one other vendor. We get together and decide to charge $3.

ACPlayer · #80 11-05-2005, 09:26 PM

[ QUOTE ]
So in the meantime, he's justified in pillaging as much as he can?

[/ QUOTE ]

Of course,unless you can prosecute or impeach.

You are aware that actions have consequences. You voted him in, now live with him till you vote him out.

[ QUOTE ]
Same scenario, but now I'm employing thugs to break kneecaps of people that try to bring hotdogs into my market. People still buy my $3 hot dogs. They obviously find value in my $3 hotdogs, so my thuggery must be justifiable, right?

[/ QUOTE ]

Well in my world you end up in a government jail, awaiting a government trial, prosecuted by government attorneys. In your world there is no government, so you end up charging $3 I guess and a lot of people go to the hospital with broken knee caps.

See, I like my world a lot better. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]