做为（中国）工人，做为一个工会会员，做为一个工会组织的（再就业）工作者，和各国工会组织的朋友，交流和讨论，我们共同的话题。As the (Chinese) workers as a union member, as a union of (re-employed) workers, friends and national trade union organizations to share and discuss our common topic.
Unions are great. Without the Union I wouldn't get to watch my kids baseball games, go anywhere, get seven days off a year, shut down for Christmas, and July 4 th, less work hours, good pay. If we get rid of unions the schools will know more about the kids then the parents do like most non union workers.
Unions were once a very necessary thing, but not anymore. They're as much or more corrupt than any corporation or governmental agency, enjoy legal protected monopoly status and bring membership down to the LOWEST COMMON DENOMINATOR. If you want to be honest and hard working, don't let your union brothers know it. You'll make the worst look even worse, which is bad for making money for the union bosses. Thugs, pure and simple.
Unions are generally anti free market, althought they wouldn't like to admit it. The example that first comes to mind is demanding pay raises above the "market" rate. People should study unions, their history and economics/politics involved. Don't get me wrong, there are some good things they do, but they pale in significance when compared with the overall harm they do.
@AussieAustrianBlog I'm in the CFMEU and I hate 'free trade', I'm not afraid to admit it. Jobs going overseas because the Aussie worker can't live on the wages they pay in Asia SUCKS. We should have tariffs protecting our local companies and jobs. Kids are not being offered apprenticeships because companies know the job won't be built in this country anyway, that means less future taxes being payed to run this country. Free trade is bad for workers in western countries and as I said I hate it.
@Spentastic By your logic, we should close our borders to ALL imports because we'll have EVERYONE employed and be a more prosperous country! Without free trade Australia will be doomed. Imports = Exports. Tell me why a country like Hong Kong, amongst others, has become one of the most prosperous countries in recent decades when they have NO tariffs and allow foreign ownership etc? Your beliefs are based on myths and protectionist/union propaganda to support their own at the expense of the rest.
@Spentastic By the way, how do you feel about Indonesia reducing Australian beef exports in the name of being self-sufficient (food security). The Indonesian govt plans to curb imports and increase domestic supplies of beef. Australian live-cattle exports to Indonesia dropped by more than 30% between 2009-10! The idea that buying beef from Australia is somehow a threat to Indonesian security and jobs is laughable. The locals are now experiencing much higher beef prices due to protectionism!
@AussieAustrianBlog For a starters Hong Kong is a city in China not a country secondly they were poor to begin with and needed trade to survive and eventually prosper. Geographically trade is their only option . We had a strong economy before globalization so we are a little different. This economy was built in Australia for Australians and succeeded without the need to compete directly with our poorer northern neighbours. Globalization is about the rich getting richer and thats it.
@Spentastic Globilization has been happening since the Industrial Revolution. Australia didn't get rich on its own. Period. Call Hong Kong what you like, the principle still applies. It's basically a country. So you're claiming Australia doesn't need trade to prosper and never did? With all due respect, i'm going to stick to debating people who put up intellectual arguments, not ideological myths.
@AussieAustrianBlog I don't feel anything about Indonesia's trade policies. Foods food and someone will buy it. What I don't like is the big supermarkets destroying their opposition, ripping off their suppliers, ripping off the consumers and their staff so the big wigs and share holders can make a fortune. That sh*ts me to be honest.
We need to start nationalizing all private business now! Our Unions will turn this country into the greatest Socialist country in the world. One Islamic/Socialist world! And if anyone disagrees, send them to an education camp! Defeat Evil Freedom Loving Capitalist NOW!
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
No justice until all union leaders are beaten with the same tactics they used on others over the years. Fuck those commie fucks who strike to get overpaid. LABOR UNIONS ARE SOCIALIST, ANTI-CAPITALIST MARXIST THUG GROUPS THAT HARM BUSINESS AND CUSTOMERS. Employers and customers lose by overpaying them. Time to ban unions.
@JoeyFudd Wages have remained stagnant over the past 20 years while production and profits have gone up. So your thought which that is what it is just a thought and not a fact is just that. So keep throwing around those big words like socialist, anti capital, marxist ect. Perhaps you may take a moment to get the facts.
@067ems No, compensation for work has gone way up when you include everything, such as health care and retirement benefits. Schmucks like you who want to punish the productive people and create a nation of serfs getting handouts from government like beggars should move to Cuba. Sneak in! Unions should be illegal -- they exist to threaten strikes so as to coerce unfair wages and benefits. It's obvious from GM to SEIU. Screw union scum!!!
@JoeyFudd You're wrong. The numbers don't lie, for the bottom 80% of people wages AND benefits have gone down. That is to say that when you include everything it's worse.
@Fuctmentality Where did you get that data? In a home of a person who the government says lives "in poverty." What do you see? Color TV's, cable TV, air conditioners, fridg/freer/ king size beds, etc. Outside is a car. Compare that to poverty in Africa, India, China. Our poor are a bunch of cushy, lazy freeloaders living in luxury by comparison. They live better than kings years ago but whine like they need more free benefits. They make me sick and should make the taxpayers who fund them sick.
@JoeyFudd The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. & Do you think stating that poor people are incredible wealthy (which isn't true by the way, most people who live in poverty can't afford a car & an air conditioner & this & that & a dog. Those that can have to pull off some amazing financial acrobatics) somehow changes that wages & benefits have declined over the past 3 decades? Does it also mean that the costs of transportation, housing, healthcare, & education haven't increased?
I work at a company (and I won't name it) that has lately had a lot of union talk going on. We actually had an all hands meeting where the big boss basically told everyone that bringing in a union is a bad idea for everyone. I'm kind of neutral, however, I'm getting frustrated with the way management does things (going against their own policies, etc.)...But I'm not sure that I want other people speaking for me. Just wondering what experiences some people have had with unions coming in.
@gcdcman81 of course the big boss would say that he knows he will have to play by the rules if the Union is voted in. The Republicans bash Unions to help the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. Union & Non-Union business make the same gross, but the Union shop divides it fairly and provides ins. and pension. The business owner that allows his workers to organize has nothing to be ashamed of and will be liked by his or her employees and a true Christian (how would Jesus treat his workers?)
@gcdcman81 unions are the most democratic thing you could possibly be a part of.
instead of one person make the decisions (the employer) all members of the union vote on issue. I love the labor movement and if it wasnt for them we would all be making pennies an hour. google this movie called "Harlan county usa"
Total labor cartels. Do Labor unions = Labor thieves/labor cartels? At first glance a trade union might seem right but the question is if it is so fair, why are the laborers building multi-million dollar financial institutions and paying the laborers crappy daily wage? If it is so fair, why do those institutions which rely on this cheap labor give back mortgages to society?
I have Union Pride! I care about the people I work with and serve as an union steward. People make mistakes from time to time and not all are bad apples.
I am in a union and the problem is that stewards are toio easily "bought" by management in various ways. Another problem is that unions protect the worst employees at the cost of all the good union employees. Unions are a real mixed bag. There are many different unions out there but let me ask you guys one simple question; Why are more and more unions amalgamating? Why are they shrinking? Think about it.
Your comment is one sided there are many different people in this world. People will think what they want to think. People will act in the conduct they see fit. It is my job to use my best ethical judgement to determine if the contract has been violated. It is also my political duty to get my fellow members on board with this kind behavior, so that they can be taken seriously by the company. I can't speak for all unions as a whole but my union has seen growth in the past 5 years. Thank you
@bhall20047 Explain the "growth" to us. Was iot done by unions becoming amalgamated? Does your union "urge" it's memebres to sign a contract after they negotiated it with management or do they truly leave it up to the membership to decide?
The way we do it is 1st selecting the negotiating board selected by the members to represent them. The board is made up of different employees from the workforce. They ask about issues that need corrected with in the contract. Then we negotiate with a 3rd party pro negotiator that has recieved demand from the company usually asking to remove benifits and give us as little raise as possible. When we reach the best deal we take it back to the members to vote. We can only except if it is passes
@TargetGuy2245 because the men with all the money dont want you to have a voice, thats why they are shrinking. If you have a problem with your union bring it up at the union meetings. talk to your representatives about your steward. im telling you there is nothing better in this world than a union done right.
Well many union companies go out of busness not because they are union but because the manufacturing industry isfucked and if a company can overseas and spend 75% less then they will regardless if the company is paying union workers 25$per hour or paying nonunion workers 23$ .
We are fucked. Not even unions can save us from globalism.
Most of you people who post on here are not a member of any union so there is no way you would fully understand. I am a Union Laborer, and i'm proud of it. Its about supporting the American way of life, providing fair wages, excellent retirement packages, and more than that in heavy construction, it unites the workers in worker safety and rights. You are part of a brotherhood who will defend these rights so contractors will not take advantage of you. That's why its a brotherhood.
To say all unions are corrupt is ridiculous. Not all unions operate in the same way. Moreover when unions and the labor movement secure advances for their workers all workers benefit, that's just a matter of historical fact.
For the last 6 months I have been stuck in traffic every day on interstate 287 due to a construction project... The general contractor running the site uses only Union labor. Every time I drive passed the workers (at 5 MPH) I witness at least 6-8 workers standing around one or two guys actually working... Then, I see the one women worker, who is probably making $40 an hour, holding a "slow" sign.... This project is paid for with tax dollars... Unions are corrupt.. Period.
@imax1971 well, why dont you hop out of your car and join them? find out what its like to be a union construction worker and find out what they actually do besides "standing around". I bet you'll find it to be a rewarding experience.
@joshua1auhsoj I used to be a member of the IBEW.. Not because I wanted to be a union member but because the company I interviewed for was a union shop.... I know exactly what unions do... I work for a non union shop in the telecom industry and do work in NYC.. I've been asked for my union card and have been harassed by local unions with the dopey rat inflation because they didn't get the bid. Why, because their service is not superior and is too expensive....
I use to be a steel worker in a foundry and I worked my ass off. I lost 15lbs my first 3 months and I can't recall any time other than safety meeting was I allowed "sit around".
The foundry is still running to this day but I however found a different job because I worked way to much for the pay. lol
I wish union jobs were like the sterio types but they really aren't.
Unions pressure the local government and local businesses into mandating their labor. Then they get the contracts. The non-union guy(the real common man) can't get that work. (fair?) The "extra" money the union labor force gets, must be divided and large sums go to leadership, while the normal worker makes a small amount more than he/she would get if not union.
Strong arming the community to provide riches for a few at the top = mafia nonsense.
Labor unions damage the nation. Union workers are frequently the worst workers that you may find. Whenever adverse actions are taken against a worker for incompetence, alcoholism or poor attendance, the first thing that the the worker does is join the union or appeal to the union for assistance. American labor unions are the driving force in the influx of illegal alien workers. Why hire a careless union worker when you can hire a very dedicated illegal alien?
@Saetta If a worker is non union at the time he gets busted he probably wont be allowed into the union. There are many non working lazy assholes in my union but the majority of us bust our asses. The driving force behind IA worrkers is the poor economic conditions of their home countries and the GREED OF AMERICANS WHO WOULD LIKE TO CAPITALIZE ON CHEAP LABOR!
@Saetta unions are the most regulated outfit in the country. it doesnt make sense to use these broad blanket stereotypes. You think that every union member is lazy? Well, why dont you go join a union and find out. The Employer will hire illegal aliens not because they are better workers, or because they are safer employees. He will hire them only to save HIMSELF money.
THEY ARE LIKE A TOOL TO THE EMLOYER, ONCE THEY GET HURT AND CANT WORK, HE WILL THROW THEM AWAY AND GET ANOTHER ONE.
1) the CRA seeks to ensure the provision of credit to all parts of a community, regardless of the relative wealth or poverty of a neighborhood. So that literally means they have to lend to people with low income and who's assets are likely not to aprreciate in value. Which would classified as people they didn't want to lend to.
so where is this "regulation which require(s) you to lend to people who don't qualify"?
(wiki) the 1995 revision by bill clinton who "asked regulators to reform the CRA in order to make examinations more consistent, clarify performance standards, reduce cost and compliance burden.
lloyd bentson, sec of treasury said, "the only thing that ought to matter on a loan application is whether or not you can pay it back, not where you live".
In 2007 Ben Bernanke suggested further increasing the presence of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in the affordable housing market to help banks fulfill their CRA *obligations* by providing them with more opportunities to securitize CRA-related loans.
You see the important part to note is that it is the two thing combined that caused this mess.
Also I think its funny that your willing to blame all of this on the free market when the banking industry is one of the most regulated markets. And the everytime I bring up the involvement of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. You aviod it like the plague. This is undoubtly because it is out right prove that government intervention is largely responisble for this mess.
idk jestoninnes, i give you facts, numbers and sources that the CRA had little effect on the housing market and you still rebut with "suggestions, opportunities, and obligations". apparently the banking industry isn't regulated enough if your statement is true. i'm not avoiding fannie and freddie at all, they were duped by banks, wall street, and insurance giants just like all the rest of us. you're falsely trying to pin a failed free market collapse on the government. it just ain't there.
idk jestoninnes, i give you facts, numbers and sources that the CRA had little effect on the housing market
First of all this is just one small part of my arguement in which you use some decades old statistics to prove that CRA supposedly has no affect on the housing market and not the lending practices which is what I was talking about. In 1999, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac came under pressure from Clinton to expand mortgage loans to low and moderate
income borrowers by increasing the ratios of their loan portfolios in distressed inner city areas designated in the CRA of 1977. This government pressure only increased under Bush. So you see all your numbers are for nothing because the government didnt pressure Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac until 1999. And it wasnt just the CRA or just Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac but the combination along with government pressure and a lack of enforcement.
"Apparently the banking industry isn't regulated enough if your statement is true
No it overly regulated. The US has the most fragmented bank regulations of any 1st world country meaning literally that is nearly impossible for any one person to know all the regulations. This makes enforcement impossible. I have already said that the regulations need to be purely at the federal level and not at a federal and state-by-state level as it currently is.
Im not avoiding fannie and freddie at all, they were duped just like all the rest of us
Your dead wrong Fannie and Freddie did the duping. By 2008 Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac owned ½ of the mortgage market. Freddie Mac had a leverage ratio of 70 to 1 which no bank could or did have. I am not saying the banks did no wrong I am saying that when you have a govement sponsored agency buying up all the mortgages you force banks to do whatever it takes to compete.
you're falsely trying to pin a failed free market collapse on the government. it just ain't there.
This is the most ridiculous statement I have heard since Bush was in office. If the banking industry is at all regulated then how is it a free market. And if it is not a free market then how can you blame the banking industries collapse on the free market. The truth is again that it comes down to corporately owned government officials.
There is a lot of proof of conflicts of interest with regard to Fannie and Freddie. The CFO, CEO and controller have all been charged with manipulating the earnings of Fannie Mae in order to maximize profit. This amounted in the payment of 115 Million in bonuses over 6 years. At least to of the former CEOs had received below prime mortgages
The chair of the HFSC (which was in charge of oversight of Fannie and Freddie) was in a romantic relationship with the CEO of Fannie Mae. Also government backing let Fannie and Freddie dominate the mortgage underwriting. They returned some of the profits to the politicians, sometimes directly, as campaign funds, and sometimes as contributions to favored constituents. So again a corrupt government caused this mess not a free market which has never existed.
I love dogs at truck stops. I can't believe Cenk just said "rassle". haha! Uygur speaks very eloquent about the nuances of unions. But then again, I'm all about unions. 23 min youtube clip come on - i have things to do ;-)
the middle class is in trouble. and it's the direct result of social neo-con power.
excellent points about the republican pr campaign to demonize unions and liberals. corporate gluttony and power is why we are in this huge recession.
why is inflation never mentioned? the average worker makes less in a year than a new mini-van, the average worker makes less in a week than the cost of a golf club. the middle class is being snuffed for profit.
It's all a result of the systematic dumbing down of the general population. The education system is in worse shape than it's ever been. The US ranks amongst developing countries in math, language, social sciences (not talking about the top universities which are still fairly good but the national average.)
That's what ends up fueling anti-intellectualism and makes citizens much more susceptible to political demagogues like Cheney and Rove. We really are consumers much more than citizens now.
In someways it goes further than that. Thanks to the patriot act you really have no rights but privialges. And if you have no rights you are more of a slave than a consumer.
Well if we're talking indentured servitude, frankly the credit card companies had taken care of that before the Patriot Act even. I see the PA more as actual government oppression as opposed to the purely financial traps that corporate America sets.
But I agree whichever way you look at it the American citizen has lost most of his power and "freedom" in so far as a human can actually be free.
megamarsvin - you make an interesting point about credit cards and indentured servitude... but who's fault is it really?
it's the consumer. anyone with minimal financial acumen knows credit cards are a money pit. where is the discipline? the public could easily set credit card standards and rates, but "the people" can't line up fast enough to throw their money at these rip off companies.
most american consumer power has been mindlessly handed over.
megamarsvin - excellent point about the "systematic dumbing down of the general population", but again i have to take the average american to task rather than the anti-intellectual campaign by the right.
yes, the right's waged social war on science, public schools, the arts, teachers, etc, but c'mon, this is hardly new. i was raised in a conservative environment. i saw how hopelessly flawed it was, and have soundly rejected it.
you and i can't be anomalies, it's too depressing.
I agree 100%, you can't blame any one part of society. We all participated, we all let it slide for too long.
But while I agree you can blame the people themselves for being ignorant and complacent, we can still blame the credit-card companies etc. for the abuse of said ignorance. We know from the stories that have come out on predatory lending, advertising, that people were knowingly led into these financial traps.
But I definitely don't want to absolve regular people of all responsibility.
"you and i can't be anomalies, it's too depressing. "
I wouldn't go as far as anomolies but would defintely say a minority. The american people think that Obama is their savour here to fix everthing. Exactly what they thought about Bush right after 911. Remember that it is not conservatives or liberals that are evil but the false dichotomy altogether.
In all honesty what two people can represent the beliefs of a nation of 350 million people. The people may have failed in letting this system come into existence but I will not fault current generations for the actions of their ancestors. People need to forget left and right and remember that no matter what could have happened it is not what happened. They need to make changes in their lives in order to see changes in their government and the economy as a whole.
They need to realize that they are the only one who can fix things. They need to realize that the government has done little that the people didnt do first. Guilds and unions existed before labour laws, education existed before public schools, and justice existed before courts.
jestoninnes - this video is about the labor movement, it absolutely has everything to do with conservative vs. liberal ideology. republican conservatives consistently vote against minimum wage increases, and vote tax breaks for the rich.
where exactly do you stand on this issue. i'm guessing you're libertarian since you lump Obama with the master of all failure, George Bush.
i'm reminded of how libertarians, even Ralph Nader said Bush was no different than Al Gore. so misguided..
First of all I dont support trickle down economics. It is my personal believe that setting minium wages can be dangerous as setting it too high causes unemployment and setting it to low cause less wealth distribution. This is much easilier accomplished with the use of free market forces like unions which are okay as long as they dont utilize government force or violence. Might I remind you that the governments own flawed statistics show that currently the unemployment rate in the US is 9.4%.
This number doesnt include those that cant work due to injury or ilness and uses a very conservative age group to catorgize the working class. The last time unemployment was this high was in 1980s after a long period called stag flation.
it absolutely has everything to do with conservative vs. liberal ideology.
This is where you are wrong you like many others have come to the understanding that there are only two solutions to every problem. The conservative solution and the democrat solution. The truth is there are numerous solutions which include unions, minium wage increase, industry set minimium wages, and tax cuts to lower tax brackets.
All of these can have the desired effect. The truth that is escaping you is that the government really cares little what you want or need they are much more interested in what there lobbiest and corporate sponosors want.
i'm guessing you're libertarian since you lump Obama with the master of all failure, George Bush
Yes I am a libertarain and yes I lump the two togehter but thats not to say that Obama is as bad as Bush but that both have grown the goveernment to an unmanagable and unstainable level. Remember Bush took on less debt a year then Obama.
Sure he spent it on things with no return but just because your speding it on things the may have a return doesnt justify taking on debt in the name of future generations. It is the spending of more then we have that has caused this mess. And I dont think a comparison between Al Gore and Bush is unreasonable either because both had corporate sponsors and both had private agendas. Gore would have and will benefit greatly from the development of global warming regulations.
Just as Bush benefited from the war in Iraq. With Gore it just so happens that his interests fell in line with that of the people. It also has to be said that in the past a great number of people have claimed to be libertarians that arent. Just like despite the fact Specter is in the democrat party he still is a conservative. You judge politicans by what they do not what they say. Ron Paul is a libertarian because his record shows that he acts like one and not like a republician.
jestoninnes, "Bush benefited from the war in Iraq"!? pretty sure that's the main reason he left with a -11% approval rating and his twin brother John McCain lost the election.
about libertarianism, which you prescribe. it's core element is deregulation of government with respect to domestic power, not real sure where you people stand on foreign issues, probably aligned with neo-con war hawks, but domestically your ideology is exactly what's wrong with our financial crisis. deregulation.
"what's wrong with our financial crisis. deregulation"
It wasn't dergulation it was faulty regulations, poor enforcement and government intervention. Faulty regulation like the community reinvestment act which forced banks to lend to poeple whom they would not have lent to. Poor enforcement because the SEC did nothing in the past decade. And government intervention with regard to frannie mae and freddy mac. Canada, the strongest Banking system, has less regualtions than the US.
oh please, not you too with blaming the CRA for shoddy banking practices. what is this? some bank commercial to clear crooked bankers and their crooked loan officers?
front end loaded mortgages, interest only, balloon payments, falsified applications, questionable variable rates... when the dust finally settles on this, i can only hope some bank employees see some jail time.
to say the CRA "forced" banks to make bad loans is scapegoating and ridiculous.
How can a regulation which require you to lend to people who don't qualify. Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae guaranteeing bad loans there by limiting risks for banks. Tell me those two things aren't at least partly at vault. Did the banks do some things they shouldn't have. Sure. But why not lend to people that can't afford loans when you can be sure the government will bail you out when things go wrong. All thanks to your corporate lobbyists and corporately owned government officials
The secondary mortgage lending industry imploded because of practices called "bundling" and "credit swaps," not the CRA. Inflation in the real estate market created a bubble, and people invested in real estate at high interest rates because they believed the property would appreciate faster than the interest accrued. CRA loans were unattractive prospects because, by law, they bore lower interest rates, and hence yielded lower rates of return.
"corporate gluttony and power is why we are in this huge recession"
Yes but you also have to realize that the politicians are just as responsible. They are supposed to represent the people not corporations. I mean now a days they should be required to wear the logos of all there sponsors like racecar drivers.
Yep that's definitely true, although again we as a people do elect them and it should be a case of "fool me once, you can't fool me again!"
We elect these corrupt politicians time and again. If we'd just spend a little time investigating it's not even that well hidden that they are corrupt.
Even though I really dislike the credit-card companies and corporations like KBR, in the end we have ourselves to blame. The country is us. The government is us. And the corporations are also us.
While i agree that government was elected by the people when you only have two choices does the government represent the people. I think Not. When the people Elected Obama they thought there would be change and while any person with a operating brain knows to be aware of a politican constently talking about change. The politican should be held responsible for what he said. He promised transparency, he promised to remove the patriot act, he promised.
The people need to hold their leader responisble. Which is where I fault the american People not for electing him but for not holding him responsible. The same can be said for Bush.
Furthermore the American people never learned that everything you see on TV isn't real or true. Iraq didn't cause 911, the US is not the land of the free, and the government is not there to protect you.
In my personal opinions its for two reason. 1) the government doesn't want you to know that they plan on devaluing the dollar to the point that it takes little to pay all the money they owe 2)They think that if you find out that only the person who receives printed money first gets any benefit from it you might revolt cause you are always going to get it last.
it's a pendulum. the fall of labor can be traced specifically to ole ronnie reagan. reagan's feds got involved in the 80's labor dispute between the airlines and the air traffic controllers. reagan's corporate lawyers determined it was a federal case due to interstate commerce.
so much for smaller conservative government right?
unions and labor started to fall and trickle down economics was set in motion. 30 years later the middle class is disappearing and so is the american dream.
Yes. Ronald undertood more about economics in my personal opinion then any other president I can think of. However it is important to note that he is a politicain and you can only ever expect them to apply thier knowledge when it serves them. In these sitiuations epecially with regard to goverment power and spending they will seek to increase that which they already have.
More people are rich today than ever before, and the poor today live with Jordan's on their feet and Throwback jerseys on so if you ask me the middle class is disappearing to the ranks of the rich.
pcarlton3, "More people are rich today than ever before"
More people ARE rich now than ever before, but only because there are more PEOPLE now than ever before. In terms of actual wealth distribution, a smaller PERCENTAGE of people are rich now than ever before, and a larger percentage are poorer. Since 1980, the net wealth of the top 10% has increased 300%, while the net wealth of the bottom 50% has DECREASED 20%.
Stop working for millionairs and become one yourself. It motivates me to become the boss not get mad at the boss because he is not paying me like I want and destroy his business.
Ackoff is articulate and refreshing. Enough of the rugged individual.
That is a myth that advantages hereditarily wealthy families.
Talk about collectivism, the wealthy are the most powerful union in this economy. By championing the myth of the rugged individual, the wealthy wish for each of us to individually go it alone, while they stick together.
See, this is my problem with the unions and managment; no matter where you turn it is all about the group, the collective, and nothing about the individual. Whether its the union or the company, if you show any sign of intelligence, education, or individuality you're going to be targeted for retaliation, put into a room with a dozen people between you and the door insulted, threatened and they're going to try to put they're hands on you. Enough with the group, enough with the 'cult' mentality.
Make the income tax rate regressive so poor people will work harder to make more money. Tell people that if they can get to a million dollars a year then they won't pay any tax at all. Anybody over $1 million per year pays no tax at all and everyone at the bottom pays almost their whole paycheck on taxes. That would get those welfare humps out there and pulling their weight for once. I also think there should be a poverty tax that can be paid by community service and blood donations.
Irony galore! .. Aren't there any workhouses? or opportunity zones for 9 and 10 year olds? And how about the old people? Social Security makes them indolent and lazy .. Put grandma to work delivering pizza for Dominos and pay her to picket the local women's clinic on Saturdays. There's alot that can be done that don't require those dastardly unions and their collectivist mentality!!
As someone who regards himself more libertarian than anything else, this was a one of the most compelling conversations for unions I have ever heard.. great talk.
It's real simple, all else being equal, I will buy the cheapest good, not the most expensive....and so do 99% of population in USA. There's a direct relationship between Labor Cost and Price of Good(s).
In summary, the American Workforce is TOAST, because the World will not stop evolving.... Global trade is here to stay.
Boom.... Tariff Bomb... Thus raising the Cost of Living across the Board, which reduces Discretion Funds (of households), which reduces support for Labor..... so once again we fall into a TRAP, don't we?
But, I am glad you tried.... I hope you see the trap that creates!
The only solution is "EVERYONE MUST BE A STOCKHOLDER", thus enjoy the fruits of profit as well, not just the privledged few. Of course, it would make difference to VAST to distribute the wealth of the few amongst the VAST.
The reason why the people who work at Honda and Toyota make $28 and hour is because the union workers at the Big 3 make $30 and hour. If the Big 3 had no union and only made $10, then the Honda and Toyota workers would make $8. In other words many companies that are non-union base there wages on what union shops are paying their workers.
Unions were viable way back when the US was the major industrial power before there was a global economy. Now a US company will quickly close up shop and move overseas where there's cheap non-union labor, and no enviremental laws. It's not right, but that's the way it is.
Exactly. The manufacturing sector in this country is finished. Why would a company stay in the US and have to pay workers 30 dollars an hour plus medical insurance, pension and benefits to put bolts into a car tire when they can go to India or China and pay workers way less? The American consumer also supports this because they want cheaper products. And cheap third world labour keeps costs of products down.
Unions do increase prices. The only thing that has kept inflation in check is imports from China. Meanwhile, manufacturing in the US has dwindled to nothing. Eliminate collective bargaining and unemploymnt immediately drops from 9% to 6%.
""ur reading this u cant go back there was a dad who got pissed cuz he got layed off so he went home took a knife than went to his 13 year old daughter and slit her neck! if u r reading this and dont forward to 10 vids the 13 year old girl be sitting on the endge of the bed waiting for tha when u wake up who ever takes care of u will find u in the tube full of bloode with ur throat slit and than the 13 year old girl will come to who ever takes care of u so hury dont be the" less"""
Lol, is that why the countries in the world with the highest living standards are either highly regulated capitalist or market socialist countries?
Corporate deregulation has nothing to do with "free markets". I don't see what being anti-union has to do with being "free market". In a truly free market people are free to associate as they please, including in unions.
Yes unions exist in a free market but they can't force people to join through violence or government intervention which has often been the case.
"Government is evil" You have taken this completely out of context as I was talking about the US government in paticular. But a government which doesn't listen to its people is Evil.
I don't know of any unions that "force" people to join. In most countries people are tearing down doors to get unionized jobs. Most workers in Asia, the Middle East, Africa and Latin America would kill for unionized jobs that pay $38/hour.
"But a government which doesn't listen to its people is Evil."
The government is listening (on some issues) and most people want unionized jobs. Most people don't like working for $13/hour with no benefits or insurance.
When unions are first moving in they often use force (peer pressure, violence, and government intervention) to make members join. After youre a member you cant leave or you will lose your job. If you try to cross the picket line during a strike you may even be killed (like Eddie York in 1983). Unions also use violence to force employers to enter into agreements. As recent as 2004 a death can be attributed to union violence.
Yeah every politican does a couple things people want but does everything that their corporate lobbiest want. So who do you really think they work for. Is a conciedence that Obama received almost a million dollars from Goldman and Sachs as a campaign contribution and then they received 13 billion during the bailouts. If the government wants to take on debt to fund bankrupt corporations they need the blessing of the majority of the people.
Since when have unions used violence to get people to join? However, union-busters have used violence to disperse unions and keep workers from organizing. Private hitmen in Central America assassinated Coca-Cola union members. What's "free" about that? Nothing.
"Yeah every politican does a couple things people want"
You're right about corporate lobbyists but you're the one sitting here protecting them and furthering their anti-union and anti-labor interests.
"What's "free" about that?"Thats the whole point member of unions have to be able to come and go as they please. In the past their has been violence on both sides both employees violently forcing employers to agree and employers doing the opposite.
"you're the one sitting here protecting them "
No I'm not. If government was small and had little control over the market there would be no point in bribing them. You are the one advocating the growth of a violent monoply ("the government')
"In the past their has been violence on both sides"
While I admit there was violence on the part of unions it was relatively rare and paled in comparison to the scale of union-busting. Union leaders being killed was more common than unions killing corporate executives or scab workers.
"If government was small and had little control over the market there would be no point in bribing"
True but corporations are also violent monopolies. Private property exercises the same power as government.
Again I'm not saying Unions are bad as by definition they are a free market force but I think they should not use force or government and neither should employers. It should be Free.
No private property cant exercise the same power of government because they can use you to fund wars. Even the biggest corporations in the world couldn't sustain violent action. The US government violence (military, etc.) costs more than a trillion dollars a year. What corporation can afford that?
The only way government works is when it is mostly transparent and accoutable to its people. The Current and recent governments were in no way either of those things. Obama has talked about it but will never follow through. The government still wont release evidence of crimes it has commited and niether will it punish those responsible. The government can't even acoount for 25% of its defense budget.
I should mention that trying to oppose free association guaranteed by the 1st Amendment is unconstitutional. So when companies try to ban free association in the marketplace (which a union is a type of) it is unconstitutional.
No, I think that union organizations are fine. I totally support worker benefits, It's just that as soon as they start using state sanctioned violence to achieve their means, I can't help but see them as evil.
Limiting competition and telling property owners how to use what is theirs through coercion is just plain wrong, and I don't care whether it's big business or big labor that's at the helm. We have to recognize that all violence is evil, regardless of the perpetrator .
The worst problem is from what i can remember ( and I might not be correct b/c may have changed) but from 1986 GM offered stock options to workers as pay b/c they were always making a profit. So if that continued as shareholders of the company i sincerely doubt that assembly line workers would want to jeopardize the company.
Unions oftens times go to far, fair wages are a great thing but unions can make it hard to be productive with thier crazy rules unions can be just as bad as the corporate powers they can also be good but any time you have positions of power people find a way screw it up
We have faced this horrible fact for the last 25+ years. Doesn't everyone realize the disparity in income is the same as just before the Great Depression? The government taxed the rich 90% in 1940 to bring the levels down. If we take away unions we are stripping the lower/middle class more rights and enhancing this already unsustainable gap.
There is a constant number of jobs out there, so given that, there's no reason the pay for those jobs can't be divided equally among all the workers. It's the union's job to make that happen.
It's not like management and owners create any of the jobs, so why should they get to make all of the money?
union and non-union companies bid for the same jobs, the difference is that in the union companies, the workers get decent salaries, while in non-union, the owners pocket everything and pay the workers a fraction of what they would make if they would organize.
Teachers unions are the worst. They're selfish and greedy. All they do is stand in the way of school reform! When people introduce new ways to fix schools like school choice, the teachers' unions stand in the way, They don't seem to give a DAMN about the children. It's "me me me me me!"
Hell, in public schools, teachers unions have made it so that it's almost IMPOSSIBLE to fire a bad teacher. School administrators have to jump though hoops, rather than just saying "ur fired."
Yeah, people oppose school vouchers because they're greedy and want to waist money. /eyeroll. It's not because it's a horribly idiotic idea in its self.
No, they oppose vouchers because they know the public system can't compete with the private sector on an even playing field. Pussies hate compitition and hate winners.
And let's not pretend like EVERYTHING unions do is automatically good. One huge reason why the automakers are failing is the ENORMOUS costs imposed on them by unions, such as pensions and healthcare. Those things aren't cheap, ya know.
Labor unions have squandered their moral authority with all the bullshit we've had to put up with under union bosses. Jimmy Hoffa was a great example of union bosses gone wrong. Unfortunately, he was far from the last of his kind. I mean, unions giving union dues to candidates that a lot of the employees probably don't even like?? How the hell do you justify that?
Or this bullshit closed shop nonsense? Where a worker has to join a union in order to be employed, rather than be his own person.
Unions are a liberal invention whose time has come and gone. Most people aren't in unions because they don't want to! Hell, at the highest level, only about a 3rd of Americans were in unions. So obviously, even in a time when most Americans had the freedom to unionize, they said "no" because their jobs were fine, and they didn't need it. It's only necessary low-skill or low-paying jobs. Besides, this isn't the 1900s with the Progressive movement.
Some unions, like the UAW, are nothing but pure leeches. They come out here to california and try to unionize workers that wont benefit at all from unions (for example, the post-docs at the university of california). If they manage to fool enough people to sign up for the union, everyone, including those that oppose the union, get a fat chunk of their paycheck taken directly out and sent to the UAW. I cannot way until the day the UAW dies. These scum need get a life and contribute to society.
Yeah man, unions are awesome. The right for people to form mobs and use state violence against employers and would-be competitors to force them to act a certain way is totally moral.
You know you're in a civilized country when you can join a group and threaten people (with the aid of state guns) into giving you a raise. Violence is, after all, the distinction of an advanced culture, no?
This has been flagged as spam show
***** Super cool buy american made ! *****
ThePolypop 3 months ago
how many union workers make 100k, how many buisnesses can realistically pay workers 100k, how much did this dude make last year, 120k
tsharpmac420 6 months ago
做为（中国）工人，做为一个工会会员，做为一个工会组织的（再就业）工作者，和各国工会组织的朋友，交流和讨论，我们共同的话题。As the (Chinese) workers as a union member, as a union of (re-employed) workers, friends and national trade union organizations to share and discuss our common topic.
yumenyukuaile 6 months ago
制度不同，但是工会体现的价值，应该是相同的。
Systems are different, but the valuesembodied in trade unions, should be the same.
希望有更多的职工代表和工会积极分子的参与，推动工运的发展。
Want to have more staff representatives and trade union activists involved in promoting the development of the labor movement.
I visit the websites and post comments with the assistance of machine translation. Thanks my friends for their understanding, support and help."
yumenyukuaile 6 months ago
Communist. Why does he hate freedom?
haysnoe 11 months ago
Unions are great. Without the Union I wouldn't get to watch my kids baseball games, go anywhere, get seven days off a year, shut down for Christmas, and July 4 th, less work hours, good pay. If we get rid of unions the schools will know more about the kids then the parents do like most non union workers.
carnypimp 11 months ago
Unions were once a very necessary thing, but not anymore. They're as much or more corrupt than any corporation or governmental agency, enjoy legal protected monopoly status and bring membership down to the LOWEST COMMON DENOMINATOR. If you want to be honest and hard working, don't let your union brothers know it. You'll make the worst look even worse, which is bad for making money for the union bosses. Thugs, pure and simple.
24601guy 1 year ago
p.s. Obama is running the US economy into the ground.
AussieAustrianBlog 1 year ago
Unions are generally anti free market, althought they wouldn't like to admit it. The example that first comes to mind is demanding pay raises above the "market" rate. People should study unions, their history and economics/politics involved. Don't get me wrong, there are some good things they do, but they pale in significance when compared with the overall harm they do.
AussieAustrianBlog 1 year ago
@AussieAustrianBlog I'm in the CFMEU and I hate 'free trade', I'm not afraid to admit it. Jobs going overseas because the Aussie worker can't live on the wages they pay in Asia SUCKS. We should have tariffs protecting our local companies and jobs. Kids are not being offered apprenticeships because companies know the job won't be built in this country anyway, that means less future taxes being payed to run this country. Free trade is bad for workers in western countries and as I said I hate it.
Spentastic 11 months ago
@Spentastic By your logic, we should close our borders to ALL imports because we'll have EVERYONE employed and be a more prosperous country! Without free trade Australia will be doomed. Imports = Exports. Tell me why a country like Hong Kong, amongst others, has become one of the most prosperous countries in recent decades when they have NO tariffs and allow foreign ownership etc? Your beliefs are based on myths and protectionist/union propaganda to support their own at the expense of the rest.
AussieAustrianBlog 11 months ago
@Spentastic By the way, how do you feel about Indonesia reducing Australian beef exports in the name of being self-sufficient (food security). The Indonesian govt plans to curb imports and increase domestic supplies of beef. Australian live-cattle exports to Indonesia dropped by more than 30% between 2009-10! The idea that buying beef from Australia is somehow a threat to Indonesian security and jobs is laughable. The locals are now experiencing much higher beef prices due to protectionism!
AussieAustrianBlog 11 months ago
@AussieAustrianBlog For a starters Hong Kong is a city in China not a country secondly they were poor to begin with and needed trade to survive and eventually prosper. Geographically trade is their only option . We had a strong economy before globalization so we are a little different. This economy was built in Australia for Australians and succeeded without the need to compete directly with our poorer northern neighbours. Globalization is about the rich getting richer and thats it.
Spentastic 11 months ago
@Spentastic Globilization has been happening since the Industrial Revolution. Australia didn't get rich on its own. Period. Call Hong Kong what you like, the principle still applies. It's basically a country. So you're claiming Australia doesn't need trade to prosper and never did? With all due respect, i'm going to stick to debating people who put up intellectual arguments, not ideological myths.
AussieAustrianBlog 11 months ago
@AussieAustrianBlog I don't feel anything about Indonesia's trade policies. Foods food and someone will buy it. What I don't like is the big supermarkets destroying their opposition, ripping off their suppliers, ripping off the consumers and their staff so the big wigs and share holders can make a fortune. That sh*ts me to be honest.
Spentastic 11 months ago
@Spentastic How do the supermarkets rip us off? Back up what you're saying please.
AussieAustrianBlog 11 months ago
Unions...we brought you your weekends... YES ON PROP 19
nonphixional1 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
We need to start nationalizing all private business now! Our Unions will turn this country into the greatest Socialist country in the world. One Islamic/Socialist world! And if anyone disagrees, send them to an education camp! Defeat Evil Freedom Loving Capitalist NOW!
clay9280 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
No justice until all union leaders are beaten with the same tactics they used on others over the years. Fuck those commie fucks who strike to get overpaid. LABOR UNIONS ARE SOCIALIST, ANTI-CAPITALIST MARXIST THUG GROUPS THAT HARM BUSINESS AND CUSTOMERS. Employers and customers lose by overpaying them. Time to ban unions.
JoeyFudd 1 year ago
@JoeyFudd Wages have remained stagnant over the past 20 years while production and profits have gone up. So your thought which that is what it is just a thought and not a fact is just that. So keep throwing around those big words like socialist, anti capital, marxist ect. Perhaps you may take a moment to get the facts.
067ems 1 year ago
@067ems No, compensation for work has gone way up when you include everything, such as health care and retirement benefits. Schmucks like you who want to punish the productive people and create a nation of serfs getting handouts from government like beggars should move to Cuba. Sneak in! Unions should be illegal -- they exist to threaten strikes so as to coerce unfair wages and benefits. It's obvious from GM to SEIU. Screw union scum!!!
JoeyFudd 1 year ago
@JoeyFudd You're wrong. The numbers don't lie, for the bottom 80% of people wages AND benefits have gone down. That is to say that when you include everything it's worse.
Fuctmentality 1 year ago
@Fuctmentality Where did you get that data? In a home of a person who the government says lives "in poverty." What do you see? Color TV's, cable TV, air conditioners, fridg/freer/ king size beds, etc. Outside is a car. Compare that to poverty in Africa, India, China. Our poor are a bunch of cushy, lazy freeloaders living in luxury by comparison. They live better than kings years ago but whine like they need more free benefits. They make me sick and should make the taxpayers who fund them sick.
JoeyFudd 1 year ago
@JoeyFudd The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. & Do you think stating that poor people are incredible wealthy (which isn't true by the way, most people who live in poverty can't afford a car & an air conditioner & this & that & a dog. Those that can have to pull off some amazing financial acrobatics) somehow changes that wages & benefits have declined over the past 3 decades? Does it also mean that the costs of transportation, housing, healthcare, & education haven't increased?
Fuctmentality 1 year ago
I work at a company (and I won't name it) that has lately had a lot of union talk going on. We actually had an all hands meeting where the big boss basically told everyone that bringing in a union is a bad idea for everyone. I'm kind of neutral, however, I'm getting frustrated with the way management does things (going against their own policies, etc.)...But I'm not sure that I want other people speaking for me. Just wondering what experiences some people have had with unions coming in.
gcdcman81 1 year ago
@gcdcman81 of course the big boss would say that he knows he will have to play by the rules if the Union is voted in. The Republicans bash Unions to help the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. Union & Non-Union business make the same gross, but the Union shop divides it fairly and provides ins. and pension. The business owner that allows his workers to organize has nothing to be ashamed of and will be liked by his or her employees and a true Christian (how would Jesus treat his workers?)
GameICY 1 year ago
@gcdcman81 unions are the most democratic thing you could possibly be a part of.
instead of one person make the decisions (the employer) all members of the union vote on issue. I love the labor movement and if it wasnt for them we would all be making pennies an hour. google this movie called "Harlan county usa"
joshua1auhsoj 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Total labor cartels. Do Labor unions = Labor thieves/labor cartels? At first glance a trade union might seem right but the question is if it is so fair, why are the laborers building multi-million dollar financial institutions and paying the laborers crappy daily wage? If it is so fair, why do those institutions which rely on this cheap labor give back mortgages to society?
qwerty198080 1 year ago
I have Union Pride! I care about the people I work with and serve as an union steward. People make mistakes from time to time and not all are bad apples.
bhall20047 1 year ago
I am in a union and the problem is that stewards are toio easily "bought" by management in various ways. Another problem is that unions protect the worst employees at the cost of all the good union employees. Unions are a real mixed bag. There are many different unions out there but let me ask you guys one simple question; Why are more and more unions amalgamating? Why are they shrinking? Think about it.
TargetGuy2245 1 year ago
Your comment is one sided there are many different people in this world. People will think what they want to think. People will act in the conduct they see fit. It is my job to use my best ethical judgement to determine if the contract has been violated. It is also my political duty to get my fellow members on board with this kind behavior, so that they can be taken seriously by the company. I can't speak for all unions as a whole but my union has seen growth in the past 5 years. Thank you
bhall20047 1 year ago
@bhall20047 Explain the "growth" to us. Was iot done by unions becoming amalgamated? Does your union "urge" it's memebres to sign a contract after they negotiated it with management or do they truly leave it up to the membership to decide?
TargetGuy2245 1 year ago
The way we do it is 1st selecting the negotiating board selected by the members to represent them. The board is made up of different employees from the workforce. They ask about issues that need corrected with in the contract. Then we negotiate with a 3rd party pro negotiator that has recieved demand from the company usually asking to remove benifits and give us as little raise as possible. When we reach the best deal we take it back to the members to vote. We can only except if it is passes
bhall20047 1 year ago
@TargetGuy2245 because the men with all the money dont want you to have a voice, thats why they are shrinking. If you have a problem with your union bring it up at the union meetings. talk to your representatives about your steward. im telling you there is nothing better in this world than a union done right.
joshua1auhsoj 1 year ago
@TargetGuy2245
Well many union companies go out of busness not because they are union but because the manufacturing industry isfucked and if a company can overseas and spend 75% less then they will regardless if the company is paying union workers 25$per hour or paying nonunion workers 23$ .
We are fucked. Not even unions can save us from globalism.
I'm not anti union just a realist.
jjason55740 1 year ago 2
Most of you people who post on here are not a member of any union so there is no way you would fully understand. I am a Union Laborer, and i'm proud of it. Its about supporting the American way of life, providing fair wages, excellent retirement packages, and more than that in heavy construction, it unites the workers in worker safety and rights. You are part of a brotherhood who will defend these rights so contractors will not take advantage of you. That's why its a brotherhood.
timothybryantdavis 2 years ago
And unfortunately he was wrong, Obama's administration is screwing unions over despite all the work we put in to get him elected.
Sammaelhain 2 years ago
To say all unions are corrupt is ridiculous. Not all unions operate in the same way. Moreover when unions and the labor movement secure advances for their workers all workers benefit, that's just a matter of historical fact.
Sammaelhain 2 years ago
In-Hosue independent unions are betetr than the big ones (like the one I beling to).
TargetGuy2245 1 year ago
For the last 6 months I have been stuck in traffic every day on interstate 287 due to a construction project... The general contractor running the site uses only Union labor. Every time I drive passed the workers (at 5 MPH) I witness at least 6-8 workers standing around one or two guys actually working... Then, I see the one women worker, who is probably making $40 an hour, holding a "slow" sign.... This project is paid for with tax dollars... Unions are corrupt.. Period.
imax1971 2 years ago
@imax1971 well, why dont you hop out of your car and join them? find out what its like to be a union construction worker and find out what they actually do besides "standing around". I bet you'll find it to be a rewarding experience.
joshua1auhsoj 1 year ago
@joshua1auhsoj I used to be a member of the IBEW.. Not because I wanted to be a union member but because the company I interviewed for was a union shop.... I know exactly what unions do... I work for a non union shop in the telecom industry and do work in NYC.. I've been asked for my union card and have been harassed by local unions with the dopey rat inflation because they didn't get the bid. Why, because their service is not superior and is too expensive....
imax1971 1 year ago
@joshua1auhsoj
I use to be a steel worker in a foundry and I worked my ass off. I lost 15lbs my first 3 months and I can't recall any time other than safety meeting was I allowed "sit around".
The foundry is still running to this day but I however found a different job because I worked way to much for the pay. lol
I wish union jobs were like the sterio types but they really aren't.
jjason55740 1 year ago
Hey! That's great. Just like what the mafia used to say to property owners. Shut up and pay, like everybody else.
petermichaelw 2 years ago
Unions pressure the local government and local businesses into mandating their labor. Then they get the contracts. The non-union guy(the real common man) can't get that work. (fair?) The "extra" money the union labor force gets, must be divided and large sums go to leadership, while the normal worker makes a small amount more than he/she would get if not union.
Strong arming the community to provide riches for a few at the top = mafia nonsense.
And all in the name of the worker.
petermichaelw 2 years ago
So you know what you do? Join the union!
Mabuza14 2 years ago
Comment removed
joshua1auhsoj 1 year ago
Labor unions damage the nation. Union workers are frequently the worst workers that you may find. Whenever adverse actions are taken against a worker for incompetence, alcoholism or poor attendance, the first thing that the the worker does is join the union or appeal to the union for assistance. American labor unions are the driving force in the influx of illegal alien workers. Why hire a careless union worker when you can hire a very dedicated illegal alien?
Saetta 2 years ago
@Saetta If a worker is non union at the time he gets busted he probably wont be allowed into the union. There are many non working lazy assholes in my union but the majority of us bust our asses. The driving force behind IA worrkers is the poor economic conditions of their home countries and the GREED OF AMERICANS WHO WOULD LIKE TO CAPITALIZE ON CHEAP LABOR!
drldrl81 2 years ago
@Saetta unions are the most regulated outfit in the country. it doesnt make sense to use these broad blanket stereotypes. You think that every union member is lazy? Well, why dont you go join a union and find out. The Employer will hire illegal aliens not because they are better workers, or because they are safer employees. He will hire them only to save HIMSELF money.
THEY ARE LIKE A TOOL TO THE EMLOYER, ONCE THEY GET HURT AND CANT WORK, HE WILL THROW THEM AWAY AND GET ANOTHER ONE.
joshua1auhsoj 1 year ago
Another pale, stale, spineless, Democratic Party deep-throater 'leading' our movement. Shocking.
IUEC38 2 years ago
1) there is no evidence the community reinvestment act, (CRA), "forced banks to lend to people they didn't want to".
2) a 2008 report actually says the CRA had little impact on the amount of homes being sold. it was deemed ineffectual for the most part.
this argument that the CRA and minorities is to blame for the current financial crisis is a total fabrication.
what's the motive?
tomitstube 2 years ago
1) the CRA seeks to ensure the provision of credit to all parts of a community, regardless of the relative wealth or poverty of a neighborhood. So that literally means they have to lend to people with low income and who's assets are likely not to aprreciate in value. Which would classified as people they didn't want to lend to.
jestoninnes 2 years ago
so where is this "regulation which require(s) you to lend to people who don't qualify"?
(wiki) the 1995 revision by bill clinton who "asked regulators to reform the CRA in order to make examinations more consistent, clarify performance standards, reduce cost and compliance burden.
lloyd bentson, sec of treasury said, "the only thing that ought to matter on a loan application is whether or not you can pay it back, not where you live".
tomitstube 2 years ago
In 2007 Ben Bernanke suggested further increasing the presence of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in the affordable housing market to help banks fulfill their CRA *obligations* by providing them with more opportunities to securitize CRA-related loans.
You see the important part to note is that it is the two thing combined that caused this mess.
jestoninnes 2 years ago
Also I think its funny that your willing to blame all of this on the free market when the banking industry is one of the most regulated markets. And the everytime I bring up the involvement of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. You aviod it like the plague. This is undoubtly because it is out right prove that government intervention is largely responisble for this mess.
jestoninnes 2 years ago
idk jestoninnes, i give you facts, numbers and sources that the CRA had little effect on the housing market and you still rebut with "suggestions, opportunities, and obligations". apparently the banking industry isn't regulated enough if your statement is true. i'm not avoiding fannie and freddie at all, they were duped by banks, wall street, and insurance giants just like all the rest of us. you're falsely trying to pin a failed free market collapse on the government. it just ain't there.
tomitstube 2 years ago
idk jestoninnes, i give you facts, numbers and sources that the CRA had little effect on the housing market
First of all this is just one small part of my arguement in which you use some decades old statistics to prove that CRA supposedly has no affect on the housing market and not the lending practices which is what I was talking about. In 1999, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac came under pressure from Clinton to expand mortgage loans to low and moderate
jestoninnes 2 years ago
income borrowers by increasing the ratios of their loan portfolios in distressed inner city areas designated in the CRA of 1977. This government pressure only increased under Bush. So you see all your numbers are for nothing because the government didnt pressure Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac until 1999. And it wasnt just the CRA or just Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac but the combination along with government pressure and a lack of enforcement.
jestoninnes 2 years ago
"Apparently the banking industry isn't regulated enough if your statement is true
No it overly regulated. The US has the most fragmented bank regulations of any 1st world country meaning literally that is nearly impossible for any one person to know all the regulations. This makes enforcement impossible. I have already said that the regulations need to be purely at the federal level and not at a federal and state-by-state level as it currently is.
jestoninnes 2 years ago
Im not avoiding fannie and freddie at all, they were duped just like all the rest of us
Your dead wrong Fannie and Freddie did the duping. By 2008 Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac owned ½ of the mortgage market. Freddie Mac had a leverage ratio of 70 to 1 which no bank could or did have. I am not saying the banks did no wrong I am saying that when you have a govement sponsored agency buying up all the mortgages you force banks to do whatever it takes to compete.
jestoninnes 2 years ago
you're falsely trying to pin a failed free market collapse on the government. it just ain't there.
This is the most ridiculous statement I have heard since Bush was in office. If the banking industry is at all regulated then how is it a free market. And if it is not a free market then how can you blame the banking industries collapse on the free market. The truth is again that it comes down to corporately owned government officials.
jestoninnes 2 years ago
There is a lot of proof of conflicts of interest with regard to Fannie and Freddie. The CFO, CEO and controller have all been charged with manipulating the earnings of Fannie Mae in order to maximize profit. This amounted in the payment of 115 Million in bonuses over 6 years. At least to of the former CEOs had received below prime mortgages
jestoninnes 2 years ago
The chair of the HFSC (which was in charge of oversight of Fannie and Freddie) was in a romantic relationship with the CEO of Fannie Mae. Also government backing let Fannie and Freddie dominate the mortgage underwriting. They returned some of the profits to the politicians, sometimes directly, as campaign funds, and sometimes as contributions to favored constituents. So again a corrupt government caused this mess not a free market which has never existed.
jestoninnes 2 years ago
This guy just said that unions want to push wealth down, not wages up, weath down. Thats not American. What is he talking about?
pcarlton3 2 years ago
no he didn't, where did he say this?
tomitstube 2 years ago
I love dogs at truck stops. I can't believe Cenk just said "rassle". haha! Uygur speaks very eloquent about the nuances of unions. But then again, I'm all about unions. 23 min youtube clip come on - i have things to do ;-)
plasticrev24 2 years ago
excellent and vital conversation.
the middle class is in trouble. and it's the direct result of social neo-con power.
excellent points about the republican pr campaign to demonize unions and liberals. corporate gluttony and power is why we are in this huge recession.
why is inflation never mentioned? the average worker makes less in a year than a new mini-van, the average worker makes less in a week than the cost of a golf club. the middle class is being snuffed for profit.
tomitstube 2 years ago
It's all a result of the systematic dumbing down of the general population. The education system is in worse shape than it's ever been. The US ranks amongst developing countries in math, language, social sciences (not talking about the top universities which are still fairly good but the national average.)
That's what ends up fueling anti-intellectualism and makes citizens much more susceptible to political demagogues like Cheney and Rove. We really are consumers much more than citizens now.
megamarsvin 2 years ago
In someways it goes further than that. Thanks to the patriot act you really have no rights but privialges. And if you have no rights you are more of a slave than a consumer.
jestoninnes 2 years ago
Well if we're talking indentured servitude, frankly the credit card companies had taken care of that before the Patriot Act even. I see the PA more as actual government oppression as opposed to the purely financial traps that corporate America sets.
But I agree whichever way you look at it the American citizen has lost most of his power and "freedom" in so far as a human can actually be free.
megamarsvin 2 years ago
megamarsvin - you make an interesting point about credit cards and indentured servitude... but who's fault is it really?
it's the consumer. anyone with minimal financial acumen knows credit cards are a money pit. where is the discipline? the public could easily set credit card standards and rates, but "the people" can't line up fast enough to throw their money at these rip off companies.
most american consumer power has been mindlessly handed over.
tomitstube 2 years ago
megamarsvin - excellent point about the "systematic dumbing down of the general population", but again i have to take the average american to task rather than the anti-intellectual campaign by the right.
yes, the right's waged social war on science, public schools, the arts, teachers, etc, but c'mon, this is hardly new. i was raised in a conservative environment. i saw how hopelessly flawed it was, and have soundly rejected it.
you and i can't be anomalies, it's too depressing.
tomitstube 2 years ago
I agree 100%, you can't blame any one part of society. We all participated, we all let it slide for too long.
But while I agree you can blame the people themselves for being ignorant and complacent, we can still blame the credit-card companies etc. for the abuse of said ignorance. We know from the stories that have come out on predatory lending, advertising, that people were knowingly led into these financial traps.
But I definitely don't want to absolve regular people of all responsibility.
megamarsvin 2 years ago
"you and i can't be anomalies, it's too depressing. "
I wouldn't go as far as anomolies but would defintely say a minority. The american people think that Obama is their savour here to fix everthing. Exactly what they thought about Bush right after 911. Remember that it is not conservatives or liberals that are evil but the false dichotomy altogether.
jestoninnes 2 years ago
In all honesty what two people can represent the beliefs of a nation of 350 million people. The people may have failed in letting this system come into existence but I will not fault current generations for the actions of their ancestors. People need to forget left and right and remember that no matter what could have happened it is not what happened. They need to make changes in their lives in order to see changes in their government and the economy as a whole.
jestoninnes 2 years ago
They need to realize that they are the only one who can fix things. They need to realize that the government has done little that the people didnt do first. Guilds and unions existed before labour laws, education existed before public schools, and justice existed before courts.
jestoninnes 2 years ago
jestoninnes - this video is about the labor movement, it absolutely has everything to do with conservative vs. liberal ideology. republican conservatives consistently vote against minimum wage increases, and vote tax breaks for the rich.
where exactly do you stand on this issue. i'm guessing you're libertarian since you lump Obama with the master of all failure, George Bush.
i'm reminded of how libertarians, even Ralph Nader said Bush was no different than Al Gore. so misguided..
tomitstube 2 years ago
First of all I dont support trickle down economics. It is my personal believe that setting minium wages can be dangerous as setting it too high causes unemployment and setting it to low cause less wealth distribution. This is much easilier accomplished with the use of free market forces like unions which are okay as long as they dont utilize government force or violence. Might I remind you that the governments own flawed statistics show that currently the unemployment rate in the US is 9.4%.
jestoninnes 2 years ago
This number doesnt include those that cant work due to injury or ilness and uses a very conservative age group to catorgize the working class. The last time unemployment was this high was in 1980s after a long period called stag flation.
jestoninnes 2 years ago
it absolutely has everything to do with conservative vs. liberal ideology.
This is where you are wrong you like many others have come to the understanding that there are only two solutions to every problem. The conservative solution and the democrat solution. The truth is there are numerous solutions which include unions, minium wage increase, industry set minimium wages, and tax cuts to lower tax brackets.
jestoninnes 2 years ago
All of these can have the desired effect. The truth that is escaping you is that the government really cares little what you want or need they are much more interested in what there lobbiest and corporate sponosors want.
jestoninnes 2 years ago
i'm guessing you're libertarian since you lump Obama with the master of all failure, George Bush
Yes I am a libertarain and yes I lump the two togehter but thats not to say that Obama is as bad as Bush but that both have grown the goveernment to an unmanagable and unstainable level. Remember Bush took on less debt a year then Obama.
jestoninnes 2 years ago
Sure he spent it on things with no return but just because your speding it on things the may have a return doesnt justify taking on debt in the name of future generations. It is the spending of more then we have that has caused this mess. And I dont think a comparison between Al Gore and Bush is unreasonable either because both had corporate sponsors and both had private agendas. Gore would have and will benefit greatly from the development of global warming regulations.
jestoninnes 2 years ago
Just as Bush benefited from the war in Iraq. With Gore it just so happens that his interests fell in line with that of the people. It also has to be said that in the past a great number of people have claimed to be libertarians that arent. Just like despite the fact Specter is in the democrat party he still is a conservative. You judge politicans by what they do not what they say. Ron Paul is a libertarian because his record shows that he acts like one and not like a republician.
jestoninnes 2 years ago
jestoninnes, "Bush benefited from the war in Iraq"!? pretty sure that's the main reason he left with a -11% approval rating and his twin brother John McCain lost the election.
about libertarianism, which you prescribe. it's core element is deregulation of government with respect to domestic power, not real sure where you people stand on foreign issues, probably aligned with neo-con war hawks, but domestically your ideology is exactly what's wrong with our financial crisis. deregulation.
tomitstube 2 years ago
"what's wrong with our financial crisis. deregulation"
It wasn't dergulation it was faulty regulations, poor enforcement and government intervention. Faulty regulation like the community reinvestment act which forced banks to lend to poeple whom they would not have lent to. Poor enforcement because the SEC did nothing in the past decade. And government intervention with regard to frannie mae and freddy mac. Canada, the strongest Banking system, has less regualtions than the US.
jestoninnes 2 years ago
oh please, not you too with blaming the CRA for shoddy banking practices. what is this? some bank commercial to clear crooked bankers and their crooked loan officers?
front end loaded mortgages, interest only, balloon payments, falsified applications, questionable variable rates... when the dust finally settles on this, i can only hope some bank employees see some jail time.
to say the CRA "forced" banks to make bad loans is scapegoating and ridiculous.
tomitstube 2 years ago
How can a regulation which require you to lend to people who don't qualify. Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae guaranteeing bad loans there by limiting risks for banks. Tell me those two things aren't at least partly at vault. Did the banks do some things they shouldn't have. Sure. But why not lend to people that can't afford loans when you can be sure the government will bail you out when things go wrong. All thanks to your corporate lobbyists and corporately owned government officials
jestoninnes 2 years ago
The secondary mortgage lending industry imploded because of practices called "bundling" and "credit swaps," not the CRA. Inflation in the real estate market created a bubble, and people invested in real estate at high interest rates because they believed the property would appreciate faster than the interest accrued. CRA loans were unattractive prospects because, by law, they bore lower interest rates, and hence yielded lower rates of return.
WolverineDeus 2 years ago
i've move this to the top of the page.
tomitstube 2 years ago
Comment removed
tomitstube 2 years ago
"corporate gluttony and power is why we are in this huge recession"
Yes but you also have to realize that the politicians are just as responsible. They are supposed to represent the people not corporations. I mean now a days they should be required to wear the logos of all there sponsors like racecar drivers.
jestoninnes 2 years ago
Yep that's definitely true, although again we as a people do elect them and it should be a case of "fool me once, you can't fool me again!"
We elect these corrupt politicians time and again. If we'd just spend a little time investigating it's not even that well hidden that they are corrupt.
Even though I really dislike the credit-card companies and corporations like KBR, in the end we have ourselves to blame. The country is us. The government is us. And the corporations are also us.
megamarsvin 2 years ago
"The government is us"
While i agree that government was elected by the people when you only have two choices does the government represent the people. I think Not. When the people Elected Obama they thought there would be change and while any person with a operating brain knows to be aware of a politican constently talking about change. The politican should be held responsible for what he said. He promised transparency, he promised to remove the patriot act, he promised.
jestoninnes 2 years ago
The people need to hold their leader responisble. Which is where I fault the american People not for electing him but for not holding him responsible. The same can be said for Bush.
Furthermore the American people never learned that everything you see on TV isn't real or true. Iraq didn't cause 911, the US is not the land of the free, and the government is not there to protect you.
jestoninnes 2 years ago
"why is inflation never mentioned?"
In my personal opinions its for two reason. 1) the government doesn't want you to know that they plan on devaluing the dollar to the point that it takes little to pay all the money they owe 2)They think that if you find out that only the person who receives printed money first gets any benefit from it you might revolt cause you are always going to get it last.
jestoninnes 2 years ago
it's a pendulum. the fall of labor can be traced specifically to ole ronnie reagan. reagan's feds got involved in the 80's labor dispute between the airlines and the air traffic controllers. reagan's corporate lawyers determined it was a federal case due to interstate commerce.
so much for smaller conservative government right?
unions and labor started to fall and trickle down economics was set in motion. 30 years later the middle class is disappearing and so is the american dream.
tomitstube 2 years ago
Yes. Ronald undertood more about economics in my personal opinion then any other president I can think of. However it is important to note that he is a politicain and you can only ever expect them to apply thier knowledge when it serves them. In these sitiuations epecially with regard to goverment power and spending they will seek to increase that which they already have.
jestoninnes 2 years ago
More people are rich today than ever before, and the poor today live with Jordan's on their feet and Throwback jerseys on so if you ask me the middle class is disappearing to the ranks of the rich.
pcarlton3 2 years ago
pcarlton3, "More people are rich today than ever before"
More people ARE rich now than ever before, but only because there are more PEOPLE now than ever before. In terms of actual wealth distribution, a smaller PERCENTAGE of people are rich now than ever before, and a larger percentage are poorer. Since 1980, the net wealth of the top 10% has increased 300%, while the net wealth of the bottom 50% has DECREASED 20%.
WolverineDeus 2 years ago
Ah... I wish more YOUNG Americans shared this man's idea.
Unfortunately they're more likely to run the opposite direction; Libertarianism. Even more rights for the billionaires and lower pay for themselves.
Shavarnarak 2 years ago 4
i'm afraid you're right. : (
tomitstube 2 years ago
I'm a nineteen year old, and I share this man's idea.
So you can have at least some measure of hope.
WerewolfActivist 2 years ago
Stop working for millionairs and become one yourself. It motivates me to become the boss not get mad at the boss because he is not paying me like I want and destroy his business.
pcarlton3 2 years ago
Ackoff is articulate and refreshing. Enough of the rugged individual.
That is a myth that advantages hereditarily wealthy families.
Talk about collectivism, the wealthy are the most powerful union in this economy. By championing the myth of the rugged individual, the wealthy wish for each of us to individually go it alone, while they stick together.
milkgodnl 2 years ago
See, this is my problem with the unions and managment; no matter where you turn it is all about the group, the collective, and nothing about the individual. Whether its the union or the company, if you show any sign of intelligence, education, or individuality you're going to be targeted for retaliation, put into a room with a dozen people between you and the door insulted, threatened and they're going to try to put they're hands on you. Enough with the group, enough with the 'cult' mentality.
franksnow79 2 years ago
Make the income tax rate regressive so poor people will work harder to make more money. Tell people that if they can get to a million dollars a year then they won't pay any tax at all. Anybody over $1 million per year pays no tax at all and everyone at the bottom pays almost their whole paycheck on taxes. That would get those welfare humps out there and pulling their weight for once. I also think there should be a poverty tax that can be paid by community service and blood donations.
p12psicop 2 years ago
p12psicop,
Irony galore! .. Aren't there any workhouses? or opportunity zones for 9 and 10 year olds? And how about the old people? Social Security makes them indolent and lazy .. Put grandma to work delivering pizza for Dominos and pay her to picket the local women's clinic on Saturdays. There's alot that can be done that don't require those dastardly unions and their collectivist mentality!!
milkgodnl 2 years ago
Dude... what kind of fucking moron are you...
First, you're going to kill the middle class...
And secondly, the government would have no money if you're taxing the 5% of the national wealth (the poor people).
You're such a fucking idiot.
PrUnEJuIcEtHeThIrD 2 years ago
I might be an idiot but at least I'm not an idiot you big coconut face. Yeah that's right you balonie sandwich shoes looking pickle farmer.
p12psicop 2 years ago
p12psicop, that's the best nonsensical list of insults I have seen on YouTube in a long while!
DrakeMagnum 2 years ago
DrakeMagnum is my favorite Youtuber of them all. His favorites videos makes my head hurt with all the math.
p12psicop 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
thanks p12psicop. I seek out your comments. They're pretty funny.
DrakeMagnum 2 years ago
As someone who regards himself more libertarian than anything else, this was a one of the most compelling conversations for unions I have ever heard.. great talk.
lestliness 2 years ago
Eh. I think Unions are old school. Time for new solutions.
flcadam 2 years ago
It's real simple, all else being equal, I will buy the cheapest good, not the most expensive....and so do 99% of population in USA. There's a direct relationship between Labor Cost and Price of Good(s).
In summary, the American Workforce is TOAST, because the World will not stop evolving.... Global trade is here to stay.
UnderseaCaveman 2 years ago
I'll play devil's advocate for a moment.
The way to counter that would be to enforce tariffs on imports so that American products would remain competitive in the domestic market.
It won't save losses in exports, but we've agreed that's a lost cause, haven't we?
True; the American consumer would end up hurting as a result... but safeguarding American Industry arguably outweighs that.
Erdles 2 years ago
Boom.... Tariff Bomb... Thus raising the Cost of Living across the Board, which reduces Discretion Funds (of households), which reduces support for Labor..... so once again we fall into a TRAP, don't we?
But, I am glad you tried.... I hope you see the trap that creates!
The only solution is "EVERYONE MUST BE A STOCKHOLDER", thus enjoy the fruits of profit as well, not just the privledged few. Of course, it would make difference to VAST to distribute the wealth of the few amongst the VAST.
UnderseaCaveman 2 years ago
Correction:
Of course, it would make "NO" difference to VAST to distribute the wealth of the few amongst the VAST.
UnderseaCaveman 2 years ago
I love unions. If, you are not in one... you are stupid.
joedafrog 2 years ago
The reason why the people who work at Honda and Toyota make $28 and hour is because the union workers at the Big 3 make $30 and hour. If the Big 3 had no union and only made $10, then the Honda and Toyota workers would make $8. In other words many companies that are non-union base there wages on what union shops are paying their workers.
JPfromFlint 2 years ago
Unions were viable way back when the US was the major industrial power before there was a global economy. Now a US company will quickly close up shop and move overseas where there's cheap non-union labor, and no enviremental laws. It's not right, but that's the way it is.
vande321 2 years ago
Exactly. The manufacturing sector in this country is finished. Why would a company stay in the US and have to pay workers 30 dollars an hour plus medical insurance, pension and benefits to put bolts into a car tire when they can go to India or China and pay workers way less? The American consumer also supports this because they want cheaper products. And cheap third world labour keeps costs of products down.
XOneirokritikosX 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
1 there was agirl named cecilia who was strangled and raped if u dony put this on 15 vids by 12 she will kill u
cutieface2007 2 years ago
That was the coolest and most impressive union rep I've seen. Jenk is great too. Great interview.
beatleapostle 2 years ago
His name is Cenk, not Jenk
icecool1065 2 years ago
spelled Cenk pronounced Jenk
TrueManaBeast 2 years ago
Unions do increase prices. The only thing that has kept inflation in check is imports from China. Meanwhile, manufacturing in the US has dwindled to nothing. Eliminate collective bargaining and unemploymnt immediately drops from 9% to 6%.
zixlil 2 years ago
You forgot about the wage cuts that keep inflation in check. As soon as the union wages go, how far behind do you think Toyota and Honda will be?
johnedwards1968 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
""ur reading this u cant go back there was a dad who got pissed cuz he got layed off so he went home took a knife than went to his 13 year old daughter and slit her neck! if u r reading this and dont forward to 10 vids the 13 year old girl be sitting on the endge of the bed waiting for tha when u wake up who ever takes care of u will find u in the tube full of bloode with ur throat slit and than the 13 year old girl will come to who ever takes care of u so hury dont be the" less"""
cratos01 2 years ago
"Government is evil"
Lol, is that why the countries in the world with the highest living standards are either highly regulated capitalist or market socialist countries?
Corporate deregulation has nothing to do with "free markets". I don't see what being anti-union has to do with being "free market". In a truly free market people are free to associate as they please, including in unions.
A86 2 years ago
Yes unions exist in a free market but they can't force people to join through violence or government intervention which has often been the case.
"Government is evil" You have taken this completely out of context as I was talking about the US government in paticular. But a government which doesn't listen to its people is Evil.
jestoninnes 2 years ago
I don't know of any unions that "force" people to join. In most countries people are tearing down doors to get unionized jobs. Most workers in Asia, the Middle East, Africa and Latin America would kill for unionized jobs that pay $38/hour.
"But a government which doesn't listen to its people is Evil."
The government is listening (on some issues) and most people want unionized jobs. Most people don't like working for $13/hour with no benefits or insurance.
A86 2 years ago
When unions are first moving in they often use force (peer pressure, violence, and government intervention) to make members join. After youre a member you cant leave or you will lose your job. If you try to cross the picket line during a strike you may even be killed (like Eddie York in 1983). Unions also use violence to force employers to enter into agreements. As recent as 2004 a death can be attributed to union violence.
jestoninnes 2 years ago
The government is listening (on some issues)
Yeah every politican does a couple things people want but does everything that their corporate lobbiest want. So who do you really think they work for. Is a conciedence that Obama received almost a million dollars from Goldman and Sachs as a campaign contribution and then they received 13 billion during the bailouts. If the government wants to take on debt to fund bankrupt corporations they need the blessing of the majority of the people.
jestoninnes 2 years ago
Since when have unions used violence to get people to join? However, union-busters have used violence to disperse unions and keep workers from organizing. Private hitmen in Central America assassinated Coca-Cola union members. What's "free" about that? Nothing.
"Yeah every politican does a couple things people want"
You're right about corporate lobbyists but you're the one sitting here protecting them and furthering their anti-union and anti-labor interests.
A86 2 years ago 2
"What's "free" about that?"Thats the whole point member of unions have to be able to come and go as they please. In the past their has been violence on both sides both employees violently forcing employers to agree and employers doing the opposite.
"you're the one sitting here protecting them "
No I'm not. If government was small and had little control over the market there would be no point in bribing them. You are the one advocating the growth of a violent monoply ("the government')
jestoninnes 2 years ago
"In the past their has been violence on both sides"
While I admit there was violence on the part of unions it was relatively rare and paled in comparison to the scale of union-busting. Union leaders being killed was more common than unions killing corporate executives or scab workers.
"If government was small and had little control over the market there would be no point in bribing"
True but corporations are also violent monopolies. Private property exercises the same power as government.
A86 2 years ago
Again I'm not saying Unions are bad as by definition they are a free market force but I think they should not use force or government and neither should employers. It should be Free.
No private property cant exercise the same power of government because they can use you to fund wars. Even the biggest corporations in the world couldn't sustain violent action. The US government violence (military, etc.) costs more than a trillion dollars a year. What corporation can afford that?
jestoninnes 2 years ago
The only way government works is when it is mostly transparent and accoutable to its people. The Current and recent governments were in no way either of those things. Obama has talked about it but will never follow through. The government still wont release evidence of crimes it has commited and niether will it punish those responsible. The government can't even acoount for 25% of its defense budget.
jestoninnes 2 years ago
I should mention that trying to oppose free association guaranteed by the 1st Amendment is unconstitutional. So when companies try to ban free association in the marketplace (which a union is a type of) it is unconstitutional.
A86 2 years ago 3
Keep going! You're making some excellent points supported with good references and fact. Impressive.
seamoremonster 2 years ago 2
Agian I don't oppose unions I oppose union violence and violence commited against unions.
jestoninnes 2 years ago
OREILLY Is the fucking best man....
wastintimelikitsfree 2 years ago
Two Good Interviews today, Cenk
dietsnapple89 2 years ago
No, I think that union organizations are fine. I totally support worker benefits, It's just that as soon as they start using state sanctioned violence to achieve their means, I can't help but see them as evil.
Limiting competition and telling property owners how to use what is theirs through coercion is just plain wrong, and I don't care whether it's big business or big labor that's at the helm. We have to recognize that all violence is evil, regardless of the perpetrator .
MDUMANOVIC 2 years ago
Sorry i meant to say 4% per year over 5 year period.
karas905 2 years ago
The worst problem is from what i can remember ( and I might not be correct b/c may have changed) but from 1986 GM offered stock options to workers as pay b/c they were always making a profit. So if that continued as shareholders of the company i sincerely doubt that assembly line workers would want to jeopardize the company.
karas905 2 years ago
Unions oftens times go to far, fair wages are a great thing but unions can make it hard to be productive with thier crazy rules unions can be just as bad as the corporate powers they can also be good but any time you have positions of power people find a way screw it up
lmcdowall 2 years ago
Income inequality.
We have faced this horrible fact for the last 25+ years. Doesn't everyone realize the disparity in income is the same as just before the Great Depression? The government taxed the rich 90% in 1940 to bring the levels down. If we take away unions we are stripping the lower/middle class more rights and enhancing this already unsustainable gap.
dirtynas 2 years ago
TheYoungTurks can suck my ass, Lilana And BigSha ftw bitches
Eclipser7777 2 years ago
There is a constant number of jobs out there, so given that, there's no reason the pay for those jobs can't be divided equally among all the workers. It's the union's job to make that happen.
It's not like management and owners create any of the jobs, so why should they get to make all of the money?
gilbet 2 years ago
Your kidding-arent ya.!
steviebkhall 2 years ago
labor unions suck balls...oops, wrong video...lol
VGsuperstar 2 years ago
union and non-union companies bid for the same jobs, the difference is that in the union companies, the workers get decent salaries, while in non-union, the owners pocket everything and pay the workers a fraction of what they would make if they would organize.
joanswitches 2 years ago 2
Teachers unions are the worst. They're selfish and greedy. All they do is stand in the way of school reform! When people introduce new ways to fix schools like school choice, the teachers' unions stand in the way, They don't seem to give a DAMN about the children. It's "me me me me me!"
Hell, in public schools, teachers unions have made it so that it's almost IMPOSSIBLE to fire a bad teacher. School administrators have to jump though hoops, rather than just saying "ur fired."
whoo689 2 years ago
Yeah, people oppose school vouchers because they're greedy and want to waist money. /eyeroll. It's not because it's a horribly idiotic idea in its self.
Exitus767 2 years ago
No, they oppose vouchers because they know the public system can't compete with the private sector on an even playing field. Pussies hate compitition and hate winners.
toldyousohaha 2 years ago
And let's not pretend like EVERYTHING unions do is automatically good. One huge reason why the automakers are failing is the ENORMOUS costs imposed on them by unions, such as pensions and healthcare. Those things aren't cheap, ya know.
whoo689 2 years ago
Labor unions have squandered their moral authority with all the bullshit we've had to put up with under union bosses. Jimmy Hoffa was a great example of union bosses gone wrong. Unfortunately, he was far from the last of his kind. I mean, unions giving union dues to candidates that a lot of the employees probably don't even like?? How the hell do you justify that?
Or this bullshit closed shop nonsense? Where a worker has to join a union in order to be employed, rather than be his own person.
whoo689 2 years ago
Unions are a liberal invention whose time has come and gone. Most people aren't in unions because they don't want to! Hell, at the highest level, only about a 3rd of Americans were in unions. So obviously, even in a time when most Americans had the freedom to unionize, they said "no" because their jobs were fine, and they didn't need it. It's only necessary low-skill or low-paying jobs. Besides, this isn't the 1900s with the Progressive movement.
whoo689 2 years ago
where is this filmed?
Libitina72 2 years ago
the teachers union is dumbing down American schools.
MaxwellBennett 2 years ago
That's true. Unions should be more exclusive when it comes to education, otherwise they're bound to lose their credibility.
seanotube85 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
stupid liberal idiots
wastintimelikitsfree 2 years ago
That man was allowed to ramble on and on.
SpiralOfWhite 2 years ago
Some unions, like the UAW, are nothing but pure leeches. They come out here to california and try to unionize workers that wont benefit at all from unions (for example, the post-docs at the university of california). If they manage to fool enough people to sign up for the union, everyone, including those that oppose the union, get a fat chunk of their paycheck taken directly out and sent to the UAW. I cannot way until the day the UAW dies. These scum need get a life and contribute to society.
bioman123 2 years ago
Yeah man, unions are awesome. The right for people to form mobs and use state violence against employers and would-be competitors to force them to act a certain way is totally moral.
You know you're in a civilized country when you can join a group and threaten people (with the aid of state guns) into giving you a raise. Violence is, after all, the distinction of an advanced culture, no?
MDUMANOVIC 2 years ago