Place your bets, please.

Who will be next year's US President?

Barak Obama
36
32%
Barak Obama
36
32%
Mitt Romney
4
4%
Mitt Romney
4
4%
Rick Santorum
0
No votes
Rick Santorum
0
No votes
Newt Gingrich
1
1%
Newt Gingrich
1
1%
Ron Paul
1
1%
Ron Paul
1
1%
Another Rep. candidate (after a brokered convention)
1
1%
Another Rep. candidate (after a brokered convention)
1
1%
Biden (because someone will pull a Lincoln on Obama)
0
No votes
Biden (because someone will pull a Lincoln on Obama)
0
No votes
No idea
4
4%
No idea
4
4%
There won't be one... Maya calender, remember?
2
2%
There won't be one... Maya calender, remember?
2
2%
Oh, shut up, Glaucon
7
6%
Oh, shut up, Glaucon
7
6%
 
Total votes: 112
Mat
Posts: 2269
Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2010 11:47 am
SL Name: Mat
Caste: Warrior
Role: Defender of Freedom

Re: Place your bets, please.

Postby Mat » Fri Apr 06, 2012 10:47 am

Kaitlin wrote:
Mat Vhargon wrote:
Kaitlin wrote:You may disagree with me but please don't distort my opinions and statements. They are always backed up with well documented statistics. Why don't you supply your own? I think in this case you know you are full of hot air...nothing new.
Just out of curiosity where are these stats that you say you have posted in support of your position that unions are not a problem anymore perhaps I have missed them or perhaps this is just another example of you not being truthful.


Rather than that since I believe my quote said I can't be bothered to look up something so obvious...why don't you point out to me those untruthful stats I posted. It should be easy right if it had any validity at all.
I have not said that your stats are untruthful I said you are untruthful in your attempt to attest meaning to those stats that is not present.
There is no worse tyranny than to force a man to pay for what he does not want merely because you think it would be good for him
Mat
Posts: 2269
Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2010 11:47 am
SL Name: Mat
Caste: Warrior
Role: Defender of Freedom

Re: Place your bets, please.

Postby Mat » Fri Apr 06, 2012 10:54 am

Kaitlin wrote:
Mat Vhargon wrote:
Kaitlin wrote:Rather than that since I believe my quote said I can't be bothered to look up something so obvious...why don't you point out to me those untruthful stats I posted. It should be easy right if it had any validity at all.
I have not said that your stats are untruthful I said you are untruthful in your attempt to attest meaning to those stats that is not present.


:lol: so let me get this right...the numbers or fine. I expected some level of prevarication from you. It is fine to disagree Mat but don't suggest when I provide valid information to add to your rather one sided argument it is untruthful. Just say you don't agree and try providing something substantial to back up your own arguments.
The stats that you listed to not prove the points you are attempting to prove.
There is no worse tyranny than to force a man to pay for what he does not want merely because you think it would be good for him
Mat
Posts: 2269
Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2010 11:47 am
SL Name: Mat
Caste: Warrior
Role: Defender of Freedom

Re: Place your bets, please.

Postby Mat » Fri Apr 06, 2012 11:04 am

Kaitlin wrote:
Mat Vhargon wrote:The stats that you listed to not prove the points you are attempting to prove.


The labor stats? So it is suggested that labor unions are a huge problem in America and it isn't important that union presence has declined to a miniscule amount and unions employees only represent a very small percentage of total employees in America?

:confuzed:

Ok you are right. We should pull statistics about the number of bison on the range.

ahh yes because something has declined that must mean and prove that they are not a problem anymore. The fact that they have declined in number does not prove that they are not a problem anymore nor does it prove that they are not influential.
There is no worse tyranny than to force a man to pay for what he does not want merely because you think it would be good for him
Mat
Posts: 2269
Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2010 11:47 am
SL Name: Mat
Caste: Warrior
Role: Defender of Freedom

Re: Place your bets, please.

Postby Mat » Fri Apr 06, 2012 11:15 am

Kaitlin wrote:
Mat Vhargon wrote:ahh yes because something has declined that must mean and prove that they are not a problem anymore. The fact that they have declined in number does not prove that they are not a problem anymore nor does it prove that they are not influential.


Now I'm curious rather than amused. If size and strength aren't relevant to them being a problem what is? Why do you believe Labor Unions are a problem in this country that is significant for the "TOTAL" American workforce or the government?
I do believe they is a problem simply because they are able to dictate to a company where it can operate... that is just one example of why I think it is a problem.

To your point though size does not necessarily equate to strength especially when you have laws that give one side an advantages in the negotiation process.
There is no worse tyranny than to force a man to pay for what he does not want merely because you think it would be good for him
Hawt Sommer

Re: Place your bets, please.

Postby Hawt Sommer » Fri Apr 06, 2012 11:29 am

Hmmm..

Found a Photobucket Graph. I'm not sure if it's accurate, but just posting it for a conversation piece

Image
User avatar
Glaucon
Posts: 2832
Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2009 9:07 am

Re: Place your bets, please.

Postby Glaucon » Fri Apr 06, 2012 11:50 am

What exactly is the problem?

Is it that some unions have too much sway in particular industries, that they corrupt etc, that the power they have goes against individual freedom, etc. WITHOUT regard of the scale on which this happens?

If it is an issue like that, relative size/strength/impact on the overall economy doesn't matter. And if it is a problem like that, you CANNOT infer stuff about how the Unions are to blame for the current economic climate or the overall well-being of Americans, like Thyri did. Because that says nothing about the relative impact.

(And as far as I know, there ARE at least some problems like that with unions in the USA. Or so I hear.)

If the claim is that unions have a strong impact on the US economy IN GENERAL, a BAD influence, then the statistics that were mentioned (probably not the statistics posted above by Hawt) apparently showing that unions are growing smaller/less influential etc. are relevant to the discussion.

More about unions: I am not a fan, generally speaking. However, I think that unions, by themselves, need not have a negative economic impact, depending on what they are like. Germany has relatively strong unions, but most of them have been willing to go along with measures that kept salary increases in check (which is benefiting the German economy considerably, at the moment).

I don't know that much about US unions, except for the horror involving corruption stories I see in movies and TV series like The Wire... and the horror stories on Fox News & friends, of course. Maybe US unions are particularly irresponsible? Or maybe it is just one of those C vs R culture war things.

Of course, unions aren't SUPPOSED to 'help the economy' directly. They are supposed to help employees (which usually means most adult citizens in a country) in various ways. I'd guess that, over the last 2 centuries, the existence of unions in nearly all western countries has 'helped' employees (in getting them higher salaries, fewer working hours, paid holidays, more safety in the work-place, etc.). And my guess is that the overall well-being and happiness of the people in the USA has increased, because of that.
User avatar
Glaucon
Posts: 2832
Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2009 9:07 am

Re: Place your bets, please.

Postby Glaucon » Fri Apr 06, 2012 12:11 pm

I believe this is how Thyri sees things:

Image

Not quite sure if it is the most accurate depiction of things.
Mat
Posts: 2269
Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2010 11:47 am
SL Name: Mat
Caste: Warrior
Role: Defender of Freedom

Re: Place your bets, please.

Postby Mat » Fri Apr 06, 2012 12:17 pm

Glaucon wrote: And my guess is that the overall well-being and happiness of the people in the USA has increased, because of that.

I do not have much issue with what you have said. For me it is more a freedom issue than an economic one but different people have different priorities. I do not know that the overall well-being and happiness increased because of unions though. Yes better working conditions that was helped that is without question I think but that is largely a function of OSHA and the gvt now so not that important to present day unions. Increased pay and benefits I do not think helped anyone other than in the very short term. If it is isolated to a given company than sure it will help but if everyone gets more money than everything just goes up in price to compensate. Furthermore they were able to negotiate themselves out of a job in many cases by making the cost of production just to great in comparison to areas where these unions are not. In many cases the unions are their own worst enemy I know of one in Ohio that went on strike for a one cent raise per hour I was dumbfounded I personally knew the union president and we had conversations about it and my impression was not so much that it was a great win for the union members but it was a way to stick it to the company.

I have nothing against unions per say really my only complaint is when the unions have to many protections from the government and is not simply collective bargaining.
There is no worse tyranny than to force a man to pay for what he does not want merely because you think it would be good for him
User avatar
Glaucon
Posts: 2832
Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2009 9:07 am

Re: Place your bets, please.

Postby Glaucon » Fri Apr 06, 2012 12:38 pm

@ Mat: glad we can sometimes agree on some things.

I do 'get' the freedom arguments. There are a lot of things that I don't like about how unions operate (I discussed that in a past thread not so long ago, so I don't want to repeat it all again). I feel that they often represent the short-sighted interests of a small portion of those employed in a particular industry. And I feel that while people have every right to organize themselves any way they wish in a free society, one should be very careful in giving any one not strictly democratically legitimized organization access to powers that come close to setting policy and rules, even when it is done through collective bargaining. No employee should EVER have to follow a union rule, I'd say (unless he or she CHOSE to be part of a union). Nothing wrong with unions having 'influence' (as opposed to actual power). Nothing wrong with employers within a sector reaching an agreement with a (or several) unions, and entering in a binding agreement about it (after all, that is all part of living in a free society), but I think that a company should be allowed to opt out of being part of such an agreement, just as an employee should be able to.

Don't get me wrong: I haven't gone over to the dark side. I am still a bleeding heart liberal commie (well, on the Mat scale, at least ;) ). I DO think that employees (and the poor, etc.) have the right to unite and 'force through' binding policies. However, I think that the proper arena for that is the democratic arena of politics. And I am not in favor of outsourcing that to employer/union agreements.

Or, in terms that might have more appeal to the more leftish posters here: I don't think it is fair that employer A in industry 100 has to give employee X more annual vacation days BY LAW (because of the binding collective agreement) than employer B has to give employee Y in industry 200, just because the unions in industry 100 struck a better deal for the employees. And I don't think that it is fair that company-owner X has to increase the salaries of his employees because MOST companies in that sector had a good year and were willing to go along with a general pay-increase in their negotiations with the unions. Because, maybe that owner's company didn't have a great year. Leaving it up to bargaining by unions and industry representatives seems rather arbitrary.

And because I love political cartoons.

This is how some here feel the media misrepresents them:

Image

Guy on the left would be me, with my best pare of sandals. While Thyri is reading Adam Smith over on the right. (Though I'd bet a lot on the claim that the guy on the left is more likely to have read Smith).
Last edited by Glaucon on Fri Apr 06, 2012 12:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Mat
Posts: 2269
Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2010 11:47 am
SL Name: Mat
Caste: Warrior
Role: Defender of Freedom

Re: Place your bets, please.

Postby Mat » Fri Apr 06, 2012 12:46 pm

Image
There is no worse tyranny than to force a man to pay for what he does not want merely because you think it would be good for him

Return to “News”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron