Originally posted by Lokrian

This was every bit as true when unions were first being formed. Not everyone was all for the American Revolution either. It takes sacrifice and teamwork to make large scale changes and progress. More on that in a moment.
I disagree that unions are needed ANYWHERE as badly as when they were first formed, if at all. The working conditions are NO WHERE near the same.

Originally posted by Lokrian
Laying it all at the feet of the union is simply not in line with the reality though. The abuse from large companies came first, and the unions came into existence and continue to exist because that is the only way for labor to negotiate against the power of large corporations.
The abuse from large companies came first. It was solved by unions. Unions won't go away. Large companies CANNOT exist without its workers, and workers in THIS country aren't willing to go work in a factory that chops their arms off on a regular basis without compensating pay. As a country, we are way more educated than that now.

Originally posted by Lokrian

Of course I can entertain the notion. I said already I am not a member of a union and I never have been. One could even describe me as an "entrepreneur", though "independent" is probably more apt. I have seen working conditions in the unionized north and here in Texas, and I do not see the lack of unions in the south as a benefit.
I'm not sure why you say there are a lack of unions in the south. I grew up in the south. The factories that kept my hometown up ALL had unionized workers. Now, only 1 of those factories remain.

Originally posted by Lokrian

And you have joined Aristotle in refusing to define what the benefits are that are unnecessary. I don't know why this is not part of this discussion if they are at the heart of what unions are supposedly doing all wrong. I also balk at the idea that we should wait until abuses are life threatening before we do anything about the atmosphere of profit before safety in the work place.
I have not refused to do anything. You ignored several of the points I made while in my arguments, and I thought it was pretty obvious that most of my post dealt with Western attitudes towards 3rd world countries. Maybe that's a bit off topic, but that was what actually got me interested in this topic at all. Ari has already posted this, but I will repeat it. The cost of BENEFITS (such as health insurace and paid leave) is now MORE than wages for the first time. Why is that a bad thing? Because, what if I want to work 60 hours and get it in cash and find my OWN health insurance for possibly cheaper than what my company is getting it for? What if my spouse has a job with excellent benefits and I would rather have the wages from my job rather than the benefits they have to force on me? Unions and the government totally prevent companies from being able to offer people higher wages for less benefits. Unions also pay money into specific political parties REGARDLESS of what their members wish. I would have to look it up, but there are certain unions well known for this. THEY decide what is done with those dues they've collected, NOT the members of the Union. A few decide for the many. And yet, if you work in unionized company, have you ever tried to NOT be a part of that union? Try it. You're fucked. So, are you saying it's better to be controlled by the union than to decide for yourself?

Originally posted by Lokrian

I never denied it could be a benefit, I said it is not enough. I suggested we require a continued rate of improvement to open our markets to those goods. Ari continually speaks of how people have no right to a job. The problem is that in America, we fought and died for that right. No one in this country is interested in being told they have no right to work, or that the sacrifices of the past were all for the benefit of the wealthy or large corporations.
No, people fought and died in America for FREEDOM and LIBERTY. I'm pretty sick and tired of all these made up rights that we supposedly fought and died for. No where in the Constitution is it written that you have a right to a job. You have the right to PERSUE a job. You have the freedom to pick the job you wish to work. You also have the liberty to not work at all if you wish. That doesn't mean that I should be paying for you to live well if you decide not to work.

That's a far cry from having no right to work, and that's a serious mis-interpretation of everything written here. You are simply not guaranteed a job by the Constitution. When people say you are not given a "right to work", it doesn't mean that you aren't allowed to work. It means that there's no guarantee that you'll work.

You have the right and the freedom in this country to work your ass off, build up your business, and try to make as much money as you can. You don't have that right or freedom in several countries. You act like all companies are nameless, monstrous entities. Behind a lot of companies are people who work their asses off in school, at their jobs, and at home.

Originally posted by Lokrian

Ari himself said American can't change the whole world. I want to try, but I want to do it in ways that respect the sacrifices already made by many here. Where is the Chinese revolution? Where is the Mexican revolution? Where is the civil war? Where is their union movement? Why do we have to sacrifice for those who will not fight even so much as alongside us to get the same benefits we've struggled for two hundred years to secure?
China had their revolution in the 1920s. Mexico had theirs in 1910. Russia had theirs in 1917. The French had theirs in the 1790s. These people all tried to make a better life for themselves. What civil war are you wanting? I wouldn't wish civil war on ANY country. Those are the bloodiest wars. I'm not sure I understand what point you're trying to make here.


Originally posted by Lokrian

Two things - First, it would be handy if people adjusted for cost of living before they threw wage numbers around. When whatever the wage is in Thailand is paid, I imagine it is not paid in dollars. The conversation is made to dollars in terms of the exchange rate. Living standards are not taken into account. The bottom line though is that wages do not need to be going down and down here just for things to get better elsewhere. There needs to be a steady rise overseas without this massive shift of money from the poor to the rich here.
You'll have to recheck my numbers. I had to call over to some cousins to check the numbers and make changes. If you read my whole post, I explained pretty clearly that the cost of living in Thailand is MUCH, MUCH lower than in First World countries. I also gave an example of this.

Wages are NOT going down here. They will never go down. They'll only keep going up. I don't even know where you get info that would make you think wages are going down. Wages are not going down here. Companies are simply going to places where they won't go out of business. Not ALL companies are going there either. Many companies that require educated workers never leave the First World nations, but those that mostly require minimum wage workers do. They simply cannot keep up with the demands of union and government. (Whether it's because they are not willing to for profit reasons or because they cannot do it without going out of business.)


Originally posted by Lokrian

These are the kinds of abuses unions fought, in many cases physically had to fight strike breakers, police that were in the pockets of the companies, scabs in some cases rounded up by the mafia... People voted for politicians who were elected on a platform of supporting unions because people were sick and tired of being used and being told pretty much exactly the same things you and Ari are saying now - that they are lazy, not deserving of a higher lifestyle, owed all they were and had to people better than they were, and so on and on. It changed because they stood up and changed it. It is not going to change where you come from until you do the same thing. It may get better for a while, but these people are not just going to volunteer their massive advantage. Eventually the effect of the vast difference between the US and the far east will cease to be enough to make things better, and folks will have to stand up for themselves as well. Why not try to get the ball rolling in that direction by taking a long careful look at how the economies relate and trying to speed up the advancement overseas and stop or at least slow down the drop in the standard of living here?
There is no doubt that many third world nations still need unions. We have never said otherwise. The unions we are discussing are the ones in the US, where Unions have an ungodly amount of power over the average worker who works for unionized companies. I'm not sure how you are even implying that I am saying any of these people working in factories in the third world are lazy. These people really do everything they can to pull themselves out of poverty and support their families in a legitimate (rather than illegal) lifestyle. Obviously, in any country, there are people who work hard and people who are lazy. People who are content to live off the government and never try to better their lives will always be considered lazy in my book. You can call me inhumane, and you can imply that I'm a horrible human being for thinking so. It won't bother me, because I will always point to the fact that there are tons of people out there who have been horribly poor, poor in ways people in the US can never imagine, and they have pulled themselves out of that. My parents lived that life. They were poorer than anyone I've ever met in the US aside from utterly homeless people. (Even those people have more cash that my family did.) They worked and labored to get out of that. When they were poor, they weren't looking for a hand out. They looked for a way to achieve and improve their family. People who are utterly content to live on whatever the government gives them and teach their children to do the same are wrong in my book. (If you've EVER lived in a rural farming community, you see TONS of these people.) For the most part, I think that the people who are in this situation are trapped and need to be educated to help them get out of this poverty, but doing that is a LOT harder than throwing some governement money at them every now and then, teaching them that the rich (anyone who pays taxes) are "evil", and using them to get you elected.

I definitely don't need a lecture on what needs to happen in Thailand. I've lived there. I have family that live there. I regularly keep tabs on political and social events there. It's ridiculous to even say that there's a drop in the standard of living here. As a nation, we are able to afford things that no third world nation can even think of affording. People who live in projects have TV, hot water, and electricity for the most part. People who live in metal shacks in Thailand don't have running water, electricity (let alone any electronics like a TV), any kind of a modern stove, or even basic creature comforts. People in China consider a board with a hole in it over a hole in the ground an awesome toilet. People in India simply crap and piss on the streets or in the river, river water that other people downstream drink, by the way. You're not finding events or stories like that in America on a regular basis. It's ridiculous to even imply that the standard of living is going down here, especially when you compare with the rest of the world and even more so when you compare with third world nations.

Unions and the constant demand for more, more, more are making businesses build more factories outside the US or to try to recruit more of their workforce outside the US. In some cases, they are simply putting companies out of business. With the airlines, the government has to keep bailing them out. That's more tax dollars to feed the monster.

Okay, rambling now. Gonna stop!

(I kind of hi-jacked this thread, I guess, to discuss more than unions. Sorry about that!)