Random Politics & Religion #08

I agree. Completely.

They have no business sticking their nose in...well, pretty much anything that isn't the bargaining process for the employees they represent.

It's become a big ugly mess of "you scratch my back, I'll scratch yours," so unions start supporting other causes of politicians to get those politicians to support them.

It's utter ***.

Most of the other posters tend to focus more on actually debating topics than personally attacking other posters. If you feel singled out, it's because you single yourself out with your behavior.

very insightful comment on the topic at hand... Mhm... I mean cmon man all we've been talking about is that they suck then arguing over the reason as to why they suck in their current form then you chime in to tell us they suck again?

when did that ever happen?

That's a horrifyingly mesmerizing gif.

So, basically you admitted to having no clue as to what you are talking about. Good job!

How can anyone know exactly what your point is when your only counterargument is "Yeah..no"

Those that can, do. Those that can't, don't.

GM couldn't exactly move it's headquarters away after being invested in the region for so long, but the company was still stuck with Automotive Unions regardless of where it goes anyway.

Public Service Unions are a different breed, but they still suck money away from local governments like crazy. Governments will eventually go bankrupt (some already are) if unions keep bleeding them dry. You cannot deny that.

It may not always be the sole factor, but it almost always is a contributing factor. But too many cases are where it is the sole factor.

Man... you are at least comical...

As I said before, unions in it's infancy stages, when they didn't wield as much power as it does today, were actually good for society. But once they discovered how to *** over a business, that's all they ever did from that point forward.

Never realizing that they ended up hurting the workers more by putting the business out of business....

Honestly, I can't dismiss KN's arguments entirely because UAW really kinda put Detroit in a serious hurt locker. You want to talk about a bubble...

This was going on well before Detroit.

It just wasn't newsworthy, because it wasn't big business that was being hurt, it was small and local businesses that were the ones suffering.

Unions do as much damage, if not more, to local businesses than Walmart.

See? Once we get away from the rhetorical language we agree.

There's a lot of shadiness on both sides. Some unions are really bad about trying to stick it to employers. Some employers are really bad about trying to squeeze their employees for every drop and give them as little as humanly possible.

There's a middle ground to be had. For me personally it's not even about wages, it's about benefits. Paid vacation, sick time, etc. I'll say "health care" too but that's only because that's where we are as a country.

Would greatly prefer a national healthcare system where employers wouldn't have to worry about dealing with that aspect of things directly anyhow.

I feel like "local business" is a bit of a misnomer because if you're a big enough employer to have a union you're not really a "small" business?

So by that logic since give also never been part of a union you have also admitted to having no clue what you're talking about? As long as we are on the same page here.

Generalized and untrue statement... Many companies are successful with unions and function with them as a part of their workforce... I won't say they don't cause some issues but as I said some of the fault lies with management as well not just their ability or inability to move...

It is never the sole factor...

I said most of the posters, not most of posts. We scare off the sane ones more often than not.

Then let's agree that if you think all big businesses are out to screw the little people over, then all unions are out to do the same.

I really can't think of a union that's actually in place that's there for the good of the people anymore. The whole nature of a union is to cause inefficiencies in business, which leads to insolvency and later, death of the business.

Except states force unions on businesses.

I have several uncles who own businesses in Kansas, a state that enforces unions on businesses. They are relatively small businesses (less than 10 million in assets), but they are still unionized.

Well, no, the nature is to give the workers power to negotiate on even footing with employers.

They've become political entities that seem to think they have to work outside of that function to make that function happen. And it's politics that's caused this because well, frankly, politicians are corrupt as *** at this point. They got democratic support, so they side with the dems on ***and businesses tend to side with Republicans and their causes for the same reason when, in truth, businesses and unions have no place in politics in the first place at all.

It's one big clusterfuck. Which, again, is why I'm a proponent of federal laws regulation benefits and living wages and cutting unions out entirely, but...

But how many employees?

I have dealt with unions before, so your counterargument went out the window there.

So, you are deflecting the issue away because you feel like it?

Can you present an argument at all about the "good" of unions? Hell, Ramy is in a union himself and he can't really present arguments about the "good" of unions....

By unions you guys mean the organizations for the rights of workers?

Oh, also, I don't think this. There are several out there that are basically neutral and try to be reasonable while still getting by paying people as little as they can manage which...eh. Capitalism. And people work for them willingly, so I can't really ***.

There are also companies out there who believe happy employees are good for business and in most cases they are.

Nothing is absolute.

1 has 49 (he is the head partner of a CPA firm).
1 has ~30 (he runs a garage)
1 has 10-15 (he's a general practitioner)
1 also has 10-15 (he is a lawyer)
1 has 4 or 5 (he is a freelance photographer and landscaper....he's the black sheep of the family >.>)

All 5 live in Kansas, all 5 deal with unions. 4 of them are liberals/democrats, the black sheep is Lordgrim-style crazy (always one in the family).

They all *** about it constantly at family reunions.

They always had that power. You don't understand the power employees, especially good employees have, even without the presence of unions.

It is the notion of some companies screwing employees over that creates the illusion of the need for unions. AKA people thinking with feels, not with their heads.

It wasn't an argument... Jesus... You made a foolish assumption then claimed that since I wasn't in a union then I've admitted I have no clue about them... It's just a weak jab on your part to try to discredit me when you have no idea what kind of experience I have with unions... It's like you try to not get it some times...

Deflect what? You're just wrong in that regard... Every company that could move hasn't and wouldn't necassarily but yes some companies have related to avoid dealing with some issues regarding union labor...

I have to argue about the good of unions because I said that some companies can actually function with them? What are you even trying to do here? Like I've soar before they do serve a function but many of them go to far after they've served their function which is usually what causes issues... That and the inability of management to deal with union workers... It's not solely a one sided thing all the time...

On another note... Care to tell us all where these unskilled labaorers are that are making 6 figures that you were speaking about earlier?

Flavin, when you want to get back to the topic at hand, let us know, ok?

I'm just going to ignore your ramblings for now on.

In the USA many unions were taken over by the mafia and turned into a extortion racket of apocalyptic proportions creating what is known now as "The Rust Belt" much of which looks like hiroshima after it met "little boy"

That's an urban myth! Something you find only in Hollywood!

/looks at Teamsters

....yeah, ***. Damn it, Nik is right!

movie about it

kill the irishman

Kansas has problems then.

The 30+ ones I can see. I've not heard of businesses of 10-15 having unions, let alone being required.

Now, personally, if I employed that low of a number of people, I'd just shoot for treating them fairly and keeping them happy enough to do good work. Which...I dunno. Maybe I need to brush up on small business laws and regulations.

I've worked for a lot of small businesses though here in PA and unions have never been a thing. I think the smallest I've heard being unionized is around that 30 mark, and that's 30 on that site for a company that's bigger overall.

Well let's walk that one back a little.

I promise you I'd have lower benefits and far less PTO. Probably similar income but I'd likely be working ~10 more hours a week for it.