Unions helping America?

[montyismyhomie]

Here you go

unionyes.org/creating-good-jobs-tops-my-holiday-wish-list


Creating Good Jobs Tops My Holiday Wish List
"Finally, and possibly most importantly, this recession should not be an excuse to simply make previously self-sustaining jobs into minimum wage jobs that perpetuate a lifetime of poverty. Our government should take this opportunity and ensure that the jobs created with the help of taxpayer dollars provide for the possibility of a middle class career, and the right to organize and collectively bargain for a better life. Alleviating unemployment by simply creating chronic underemployment is not a solution!"

The modern day union is no longer content with minimum wage. The train for "livable wage" left quite awhile ago.

[aztec70]

Jan 21, 2011 14:34:12 GMT -8 montyismyhomie said:

Here you go

unionyes.org/creating-good-jobs-tops-my-holiday-wish-list


Creating Good Jobs Tops My Holiday Wish List
"Finally, and possibly most importantly, this recession should not be an excuse to simply make previously self-sustaining jobs into minimum wage jobs that perpetuate a lifetime of poverty. Our government should take this opportunity and ensure that the jobs created with the help of taxpayer dollars provide for the possibility of a middle class career, and the right to organize and collectively bargain for a better life. Alleviating unemployment by simply creating chronic underemployment is not a solution!"

The modern day union is no longer content with minimum wage. The train for "livable wage" left quite awhile ago.

Let me see, since unions want people to have better jobs than minimum wage that means they are against minimum wage. Is that your point?

I was hoping you would be able to find a citation where unions wanted to do away with minimum wage. That would have made your point.

[inocuace]

Jan 21, 2011 9:03:52 GMT -8 ptsdthor said:

The basic premise is this...any organization that keeps the current set of buffoons controlling the economy and Government in power is detrimental to the US.

Unions back Obama and the clueless leftists in Congress and those from academia he hired to implement the long desired Marxist-light policies awash with entitlements, higher taxes, unfunded mandates, more regulations, centralized power, sweetheart deals for political cronies, abandonment of US sovereignty, etc., etc. They are not your friend.

Unions engage in politically protected extortion for the benefit of the few at the expense of the many. All you have to do is look at the economic health of the City of San Diego, State of CA and spend a day at the DMV to see the real benefits the Unions have for the average Joe.

Aside from the puerile name calling, your assertion that unions are in a position to extort anyone is a particularly interesting charge.

Unions have been declining for 40 years. Compared to the influence wielded by private business interest, union influence has become nearly negligible.

You used an example of the DMV as a reason to blame the union representing the employees. How do you know the union caused the lousy service? It seems like you are making an unsubstantiated accusation to me. By contrast, I could easily cite a dozen examples off the top of my head, of incompetence, inattention and just pure stupidity from private employees.

Frankly I don't care if you don't like public employees. I don't care that you think liberals are Marxists. I frankly don't care if you think liberals and academics are clueless. All I ask is that you make a commonsensical argument.

May I ask you a question? Why, in God's name, did you go to college if academics are clueless?

[aztecwin]

Not really a union issue I would think. Entry level jobs are not careers and wages should be market driven. You do not want an artificial floor on wages to trap people into those jobs. You want people to get some experience and then move on to more demanding employment.

[montyismyhomie]

Jan 21, 2011 22:49:00 GMT -8 aztec70 said:

Jan 21, 2011 14:34:12 GMT -8 montyismyhomie said:

Here you go

unionyes.org/creating-good-jobs-tops-my-holiday-wish-list


Creating Good Jobs Tops My Holiday Wish List
"Finally, and possibly most importantly, this recession should not be an excuse to simply make previously self-sustaining jobs into minimum wage jobs that perpetuate a lifetime of poverty. Our government should take this opportunity and ensure that the jobs created with the help of taxpayer dollars provide for the possibility of a middle class career, and the right to organize and collectively bargain for a better life. Alleviating unemployment by simply creating chronic underemployment is not a solution!"

The modern day union is no longer content with minimum wage. The train for "livable wage" left quite awhile ago.

Let me see, since unions want people to have better jobs than minimum wage that means they are against minimum wage. Is that your point?

I was hoping you would be able to find a citation where unions wanted to do away with minimum wage. That would have made your point.

Our discussion has taken us to a point where the answer is more philosophical than factual. Unions are not against the concept of minimum wage as a base level of protection however they are against creating more minimum wage jobs. You say to-may-toe, I say to-mah-toe. Your interpretation however, is not practically useful for describing what the unions preach and what policies they spend their money to try to influence TODAY.

@inocuace
"Unions have been declining for 40 years. Compared to the influence wielded by private business interest, union influence has become nearly negligible. "

Private sector unions have been declining while public sector unions have remained exactly the same. In any case their influence is still the complete opposite of negligible. Unions pretty much run the city of San Diego as it is. Obama's first act as President was to pay back the unions by promoting the use of Project Labor Agreements on Federal Projects. If the first act of a new president benefits your group to the tune of billions of dollars your influence is not negligible.

[inocuace]

Jan 20, 2011 17:12:35 GMT -8 The Great Aztec Joe said:

Unions are still a necessity, but even I as a Born Again Liberal believe many of them have become too powerful.

Joe, you are real smart, so tell me. Haven't some businesses become too powerful? Conservatives assign all this blame on unions, when businesses do the same or worse.
As far as hiring picketers is concerned, I was watching an old newsreel where the narrator described a hired union buster. This guy told the audience how he would work with companies to stop strikes and destroy unions. Back then businesses were beating union members to a pulp. Yes, there was violence on both sides, I know. The only modern difference is that there is less violence and unions have lost.

Conservatives are supposedly free market capitalists, but they are not willing to allow a person to find a way to negotiate with a business as an equal. That equality is supposed to be the very foundation of Capitalism. I can only assume that Conservatives hate Capitalism.

[ptsdthor]

Jan 22, 2011 7:55:30 GMT -8 @inocuace said:

Jan 21, 2011 9:03:52 GMT -8 ptsdthor said:

The basic premise is this...any organization that keeps the current set of buffoons controlling the economy and Government in power is detrimental to the US.

Unions back Obama and the clueless leftists in Congress and those from academia he hired to implement the long desired Marxist-light policies awash with entitlements, higher taxes, unfunded mandates, more regulations, centralized power, sweetheart deals for political cronies, abandonment of US sovereignty, etc., etc. They are not your friend.

Unions engage in politically protected extortion for the benefit of the few at the expense of the many. All you have to do is look at the economic health of the City of San Diego, State of CA and spend a day at the DMV to see the real benefits the Unions have for the average Joe.

Aside from the puerile name calling, your assertion that unions are in a position to extort anyone is a particularly interesting charge.

Unions have been declining for 40 years. Compared to the influence wielded by private business interest, union influence has become nearly negligible.

You used an example of the DMV as a reason to blame the union representing the employees. How do you know the union caused the lousy service? It seems like you are making an unsubstantiated accusation to me. By contrast, I could easily cite a dozen examples off the top of my head, of incompetence, inattention and just pure stupidity from private employees.

Frankly I don't care if you don't like public employees. I don't care that you think liberals are Marxists. I frankly don't care if you think liberals and academics are clueless. All I ask is that you make a commonsensical argument.

May I ask you a question? Why, in God's name, did you go to college if academics are clueless?

Academics are often clueless when it comes to the workings of the real world. I would no more hire a coach who never played a down of football in his life and thinks that the offense isn't an important part of the game than hire a liberal economist from University to direct the recovery having never led a for-profit company nor created a job and thinks that private sector capitalism is some unavoidable evil that should be squelched for the sake of their particular clique's view of "social justice".

College serves its purpose as a learning and testing ground for individuals from which careers enhanced by experience are started. They are not Plato's academies full of masterminds who are necessarily better economists, politicians, soldiers, etc that their students who actually go on to live their lives in their respective disciplines. Its the case of having adequate amounts of analytical intelligence but very little practical intelligence.

By the way, I see you altogether avoided the financial condition of the city and state and its cause and effect relationship with the public Unions. And sure, there may not be a cause and effect relationship between the SEIU and the $hitty service you get at the DMV. Believe what you will.

[inevitec]

Jan 24, 2011 8:56:13 GMT -8 ptsdthor said:

Jan 22, 2011 7:55:30 GMT -8 @inocuace said:

Aside from the puerile name calling, your assertion that unions are in a position to extort anyone is a particularly interesting charge.

Unions have been declining for 40 years. Compared to the influence wielded by private business interest, union influence has become nearly negligible.

You used an example of the DMV as a reason to blame the union representing the employees. How do you know the union caused the lousy service? It seems like you are making an unsubstantiated accusation to me. By contrast, I could easily cite a dozen examples off the top of my head, of incompetence, inattention and just pure stupidity from private employees.

Frankly I don't care if you don't like public employees. I don't care that you think liberals are Marxists. I frankly don't care if you think liberals and academics are clueless. All I ask is that you make a commonsensical argument.

May I ask you a question? Why, in God's name, did you go to college if academics are clueless?

Academics are often clueless when it comes to the workings of the real world. I would no more hire a coach who never played a down of football in his life and thinks that the offense isn't an important part of the game than hire a liberal economist from University to direct the recovery having never led a for-profit company nor created a job and thinks that private sector capitalism is some unavoidable evil that should be squelched for the sake of their particular clique's view of "social justice".

College serves its purpose as a learning and testing ground for individuals from which careers enhanced by experience are started. They are not Plato's academies full of masterminds who are necessarily better economists, politicians, soldiers, etc that their students who actually go on to live their lives in their respective disciplines. Its the case of having adequate amounts of analytical intelligence but very little practical intelligence.

By the way, I see you altogether avoided the financial condition of the city and state and its cause and effect relationship with the public Unions. And sure, there may not be a cause and effect relationship between the SEIU and the $hitty service you get at the DMV. Believe what you will.

I cannot speak to the state of California, nor can I comment intelligently on its finances. I do not live in California and I haven't lived in San Diego since 1980. Therefore, I do not follow what happens there. But, the BLS says that state unions representation has declined.

Unions are in general decline and that is a fact.

You didn't explain why you went to college if you did not trust the teachers. Why bother? If they are clueless they have nothing to offer you-right? No trust no learning.

I will also believe what I will. You could not convince me, short of taking me there, that it was dark at the bottom of the Kubera cave.
And, thank you very much, I prefer not to be in close physical contact with conservatives anyway.

You may now resume your normal name calling.

[ptsdthor]

Jan 24, 2011 17:54:44 GMT -8 @inevitec said:

Jan 24, 2011 8:56:13 GMT -8 ptsdthor said:

Academics are often clueless when it comes to the workings of the real world. I would no more hire a coach who never played a down of football in his life and thinks that the offense isn't an important part of the game than hire a liberal economist from University to direct the recovery having never led a for-profit company nor created a job and thinks that private sector capitalism is some unavoidable evil that should be squelched for the sake of their particular clique's view of "social justice".

College serves its purpose as a learning and testing ground for individuals from which careers enhanced by experience are started. They are not Plato's academies full of masterminds who are necessarily better economists, politicians, soldiers, etc that their students who actually go on to live their lives in their respective disciplines. Its the case of having adequate amounts of analytical intelligence but very little practical intelligence.

By the way, I see you altogether avoided the financial condition of the city and state and its cause and effect relationship with the public Unions. And sure, there may not be a cause and effect relationship between the SEIU and the $hitty service you get at the DMV. Believe what you will.

I cannot speak to the state of California, nor can I comment intelligently on its finances. I do not live in California and I haven't lived in San Diego since 1980. Therefore, I do not follow what happens there. But, the BLS says that state unions representation has declined.

Unions are in general decline and that is a fact.

You didn't explain why you went to college if you did not trust the teachers. Why bother? If they are clueless they have nothing to offer you-right? No trust no learning.

I will also believe what I will. You could not convince me, short of taking me there, that it was dark at the bottom of the Kubera cave.
And, thank you very much, I prefer not to be in close physical contact with conservatives anyway.

You may now resume your normal name calling.

Here is some current background on public sector labor unions.

www.cato.org/pubs/journal/cj30n1/cj30n1-5.pdf

If and when you do try to no longer be ignorant of the fiscal crisis in San Diego and California, you will find that public sector labor Unions are primary causes.

Sure, membership in labor unions are down as a whole but the paper notes that public sector labor union membership has been on a steady rise. Not that the overall numbers of Union members adds or detracts from their attempts at politically protected extortion.

And as far as college & university goes, many fields of study are not affected by the generally leftist political ideologies of the professors. That was true in my case. Their political opinions were irrelevant and generally took no part in the curriculum.

But for the disciplines where the personal beliefs of the professors are often injected, one can take heart that, besides their best efforts, college is where one learns how to think, not what to think. So even in the areas of liberal arts, etc, one can get a good education without having to take the professor's beliefs as truth. But, inevitably, some students suck up the leftist pablum directly and fail to think for themselves.

So professors, even though they know how to think critically, don't necessarily themselves have the correct perspectives to come up with best solutions for the nation. And we have seen that in spades with the Obama Administration.

[inocuace]

Jan 25, 2011 8:47:02 GMT -8 ptsdthor said:

Jan 24, 2011 17:54:44 GMT -8 @inevitec said:

I cannot speak to the state of California, nor can I comment intelligently on its finances. I do not live in California and I haven't lived in San Diego since 1980. Therefore, I do not follow what happens there. But, the BLS says that state unions representation has declined.

Unions are in general decline and that is a fact.

You didn't explain why you went to college if you did not trust the teachers. Why bother? If they are clueless they have nothing to offer you-right? No trust no learning.

I will also believe what I will. You could not convince me, short of taking me there, that it was dark at the bottom of the Kubera cave.
And, thank you very much, I prefer not to be in close physical contact with conservatives anyway.

You may now resume your normal name calling.

Here is some current background on public sector labor unions.

www.cato.org/pubs/journal/cj30n1/cj30n1-5.pdf

If and when you do try to no longer be ignorant of the fiscal crisis in San Diego and California, you will find that public sector labor Unions are primary causes.

Sure, membership in labor unions are down as a whole but the paper notes that public sector labor union membership has been on a steady rise. Not that the overall numbers of Union members adds or detracts from their attempts at politically protected extortion.

And as far as college & university goes, many fields of study are not affected by the generally leftist political ideologies of the professors. That was true in my case. Their political opinions were irrelevant and generally took no part in the curriculum.

But for the disciplines where the personal beliefs of the professors are often injected, one can take heart that, besides their best efforts, college is where one learns how to think, not what to think. So even in the areas of liberal arts, etc, one can get a good education without having to take the professor's beliefs as truth. But, inevitably, some students suck up the leftist pablum directly and fail to think for themselves.

So professors, even though they know how to think critically, don't necessarily themselves have the correct perspectives to come up with best solutions for the nation. And we have seen that in spades with the Obama Administration.

I am not ignorant. I am disinterested. Any idiot can look up the necessary information on the net to debate you, but I didn't feel like it. But to characterize California's (or San Diego's) situation as simply the fault of unions, is a self serving and simple minded conclusion. Understanding the truth demands a full analysis of a very complex set of facts and circumstances. Texas, for example, is going down the toilet, to a degree that makes California look good. Texas unions are moribund and the leadership of the state is very conservative. So the unions are at fault there too? I doubt it.

Incidentally, the BLS tables I read showed a decline in state and local union membership as a percentage. I read no article. I read the table.

I don't accept anyone's pablum either. And I am pretty liberal. I haven't purchased any pablum from you either. I once told a professor to "f off". I was too old a student for that crap.

To me the best solutions for this nation would involve some sense of responsibility. There is none to be had from too many in this country. I want my own and to hell with everyone else defeats the purpose of coalescing for the common good, which is what a nation is for.

[aztecwin]

When you talk about our problem here in California, you need to be talking about the Public Sector Unions primarily. That is the major problem.

[theman]

Unions were obviously organized by workers to protect themselves against abuse in the private sector back when the USA was less of the social welfare state that we are in now. The idea that it is necessary to organize Public Sector Unions to protect workers from the oppressive working conditions of government is ludicrious. The taxpayers, cities, counties and states are going broke because of it. BTW, President Obama yesterday allowed another oppressed government agency worker to unionize...The TSA Agents!

[inocuace]

Feb 5, 2011 9:17:43 GMT -8 theman said:

Unions were obviously organized by workers to protect themselves against abuse in the private sector back when the USA was less of the social welfare state that we are in now. The idea that it is necessary to organize Public Sector Unions to protect workers from the oppressive working conditions of government is ludicrious. The taxpayers, cities, counties and states are going broke because of it. BTW, President Obama yesterday allowed another oppressed government agency worker to unionize...The TSA Agents!

The thought that you are against people organizing to protect their interest is wrong. Your effort to blame unions for a problem that is far more complex is simple minded and characterized by inflexible reflexive ideology. States with poor union representation are in terrible debt too.

You just want a simple cause to berate and you want a single entity to blame for your frustration.

If everything had a simple answer and a simple identifiable enemy, everyone would be a conservative . And that will never happen, because the world is more complex than you will allow.

[theman]

The Problem with the benefits that Publice Service Unions derive from negotiating with the govenment is a one sided negotiation. Those that decide their benefits work for the government and in most cases are covered by comprable benefits if not more benefits. There is no arms length negotiation. Its nothing about conservative or liberal its pork barrel economics. At least the Private Sector is arms length negotiation.

[aztecwin]

Feb 5, 2011 11:00:01 GMT -8 theman said:

The Problem with the benefits that Publice Service Unions derive from negotiating with the govenment is a one sided negotiation. Those that decide their benefits work for the government and in most cases are covered by comprable benefits if not more benefits. There is no arms length negotiation. Its nothing about conservative or liberal its pork barrel economics. At least the Private Sector is arms length negotiation.

I might not go that far, but it is true that management generally goes along for the ride when some new "bennie" is received by the rank and file.

[inocuace]

Jan 21, 2011 9:03:52 GMT -8 ptsdthor said:

The basic premise is this...any organization that keeps the current set of buffoons controlling the economy and Government in power is detrimental to the US.

Unions back Obama and the clueless leftists in Congress and those from academia he hired to implement the long desired Marxist-light policies awash with entitlements, higher taxes, unfunded mandates, more regulations, centralized power, sweetheart deals for political cronies, abandonment of US sovereignty, etc., etc. They are not your friend.

Unions engage in politically protected extortion for the benefit of the few at the expense of the many. All you have to do is look at the economic health of the City of San Diego, State of CA and spend a day at the DMV to see the real benefits the Unions have for the average Joe.

ptsdthor, you are truly the master of the tiresome post. In this particular screed you have exaggerated, generalized, name called and judged.

You know, I might acknowledge that you have the twinkling of a point occasionally, if it were not possible for me to level exactly the same charges toward business interests, private industry and conservatives.

Business interests, private industry and conservatives are every bit as clueless, willing to extort, and as determined to sink the country for their own benefit as you say unions and liberals are.

I don't think your facile enough to get that though.

[aztecwin]

Feb 5, 2011 16:45:54 GMT -8 @inocuace said:

Jan 21, 2011 9:03:52 GMT -8 ptsdthor said:

The basic premise is this...any organization that keeps the current set of buffoons controlling the economy and Government in power is detrimental to the US.

Unions back Obama and the clueless leftists in Congress and those from academia he hired to implement the long desired Marxist-light policies awash with entitlements, higher taxes, unfunded mandates, more regulations, centralized power, sweetheart deals for political cronies, abandonment of US sovereignty, etc., etc. They are not your friend.

Unions engage in politically protected extortion for the benefit of the few at the expense of the many. All you have to do is look at the economic health of the City of San Diego, State of CA and spend a day at the DMV to see the real benefits the Unions have for the average Joe.

ptsdthor, you are truly the master of the tiresome post. In this particular screed you have exaggerated, generalized, name called and judged.

You know, I might acknowledge that you have the twinkling of a point occasionally, if it were not possible for me to level exactly the same charges toward business interests, private industry and conservatives.

Business interests, private industry and conservatives are every bit as clueless, willing to extort, and as determined to sink the country for their own benefit as you say unions and liberals are.

I don't think your facile enough to get that though.

Do you think it is OK for unions to engage in political activity? If so, should they be able to engage in promoting positions that their membership does not agree with?

[inocuace]

Feb 5, 2011 17:07:40 GMT -8 aztecwin said:

Feb 5, 2011 16:45:54 GMT -8 @inocuace said:

ptsdthor, you are truly the master of the tiresome post. In this particular screed you have exaggerated, generalized, name called and judged.

You know, I might acknowledge that you have the twinkling of a point occasionally, if it were not possible for me to level exactly the same charges toward business interests, private industry and conservatives.

Business interests, private industry and conservatives are every bit as clueless, willing to extort, and as determined to sink the country for their own benefit as you say unions and liberals are.

I don't think your facile enough to get that though.

Do you think it is OK for unions to engage in political activity? If so, should they be able to engage in promoting positions that their membership does not agree with?

Let me answer you this way.

If business can be politically active (see Citizens United) then, for God's sake, unions can be as well. Businesses never promote a position many of their shareholders don't like? Yes. GD it. They do. And you know it.

I am not saying unions do not have their problems. They absolutely do.

What you conservatives refuse to see is that business, conservatives and religious disciples suffer from the same shortcomings. Shortcomings that you rail about in liberals but ignore in your own. As I said you conservatives ain't very facile.

[inocuace]

Jan 22, 2011 12:31:12 GMT -8 montyismyhomie said:

Jan 21, 2011 22:49:00 GMT -8 aztec70 said:

Let me see, since unions want people to have better jobs than minimum wage that means they are against minimum wage. Is that your point?

I was hoping you would be able to find a citation where unions wanted to do away with minimum wage. That would have made your point.

Our discussion has taken us to a point where the answer is more philosophical than factual. Unions are not against the concept of minimum wage as a base level of protection however they are against creating more minimum wage jobs. You say to-may-toe, I say to-mah-toe. Your interpretation however, is not practically useful for describing what the unions preach and what policies they spend their money to try to influence TODAY.

@inocuace
"Unions have been declining for 40 years. Compared to the influence wielded by private business interest, union influence has become nearly negligible. "

Private sector unions have been declining while public sector unions have remained exactly the same. In any case their influence is still the complete opposite of negligible. Unions pretty much run the city of San Diego as it is. Obama's first act as President was to pay back the unions by promoting the use of Project Labor Agreements on Federal Projects. If the first act of a new president benefits your group to the tune of billions of dollars your influence is not negligible.

And most of what George Bush, Ronald Reagan, etc. did was antithetical to unions. So your point is?

I don't live in San Diego anymore. But I am sure that you exaggerate union influence. If you did not have an axe to grind I might buy, but I trust little that conservatives write.

Complete opposite of negligible? Well sh*t, partner! I disagree.

[aztecwin]

Feb 5, 2011 20:18:02 GMT -8 @inocuace said:

Feb 5, 2011 17:07:40 GMT -8 aztecwin said:

Do you think it is OK for unions to engage in political activity? If so, should they be able to engage in promoting positions that their membership does not agree with?

Let me answer you this way.

If business can be politically active (see Citizens United) then, for God's sake, unions can be as well. Businesses never promote a position many of their shareholders don't like? Yes. GD it. They do. And you know it.

I am not saying unions do not have their problems. They absolutely do.

What you conservatives refuse to see is that business, conservatives and religious disciples suffer from the same shortcomings. Shortcomings that you rail about in liberals but ignore in your own. As I said you conservatives ain't very facile.

Have you considered that when a large Company offends it's shareholders, they can sell their shares and invest in an issue that does not offend?

I guess a union member could quit his job as well, but he is much more bound to his union and job than is a shareholder in a publicly traded company.

But you know all that.