How I've Warmed Up To Unions

Cypress said:
I understand that. But libertarians and their republican allies support policies that have weakened unions.
Click to expand...

Incorrect. Any Libertarian I know, supports the concept of unions. The chairman of my county LP Party stepped down to hand me the reigns a couple years back so he could spend time working with the union he took a lead role with. It actually forced me to think about the concept of unions then, because I was going to need to issue a statement of support. The rest of the group went right along with me.

The most well-known Libertarian (Ron Paul), also supports the idea of unions:
 
As a worker I'd love a union.
As an investor I don't think I'd touch a union company with a ten foot pool.
An thus you have the dilema
He who holds the purse strings makes the rules.
 
I think the misunderstanding of Libertarian's views on unions is when the subject comes up concerning government interference.

A group of workers organizing is not a problem. The government (or a political party) constantly taking the side of the union is a big problem.
 
Topspin said:
As a worker I'd love a union.
As an investor I don't think I'd touch a union company with a ten foot pool.
An thus you have the dilema
He who holds the purse strings makes the rules.
Click to expand...

People with money trade it for work. They both have something to offer, both hold some part of the string, and the workers have the right to organize to get fair value.
 
Unions are supported by Libertarians, the usual uninformed people tend to believe that all people who are libertarian are "anarchists" or some such nonsense. I used to talk to Cypress about this all the time, Labor is part of the market and finding effective means to negotiate is never against a libertarian view.

I don't support the union here and I fight against it but not because I hate all unions. I just believe this particular one has begun to go backwards rather than forwards and has become a tool of a political party. It isn't that government supports them, it is that they actually take that extra step and they have become a campaign branch of a party.
 
WinterBorn said:
I think the misunderstanding of Libertarian's views on unions is when the subject comes up concerning government interference.

A group of workers organizing is not a problem. The government (or a political party) constantly taking the side of the union is a big problem.
Click to expand...

I honestly think the misunderstanding is on purpose. You see how the Reps and Dems fight with other with disingenious banter. They are always trying to pin each other to something bad. So they do the same thing with Libertarians, but its easier because people know little about our stance on things. So their is a lot of ignorance, but you wouldn't expect to see that same ignorance on a politcal message board full of informed individuals, those people are the ones that do it on purpose to try and misinform. They wouldn't want people knowing our real stance, it just makes too much sense.
 
DigitalDave said:
People with money trade it for work. They both have something to offer, both hold some part of the string, and the workers have the right to organize to get fair value.
Click to expand...

where did I say they didn't have the right.
I said I don't want to invest in a union company and most investors don't as well.
 
DigitalDave said:
I honestly think the misunderstanding is on purpose. You see how the Reps and Dems fight with other with disingenious banter. They are always trying to pin each other to something bad. So they do the same thing with Libertarians, but its easier because people know little about our stance on things. So their is a lot of ignorance, but you wouldn't expect to see that same ignorance on a politcal message board full of informed individuals, those people are the ones that do it on purpose to try and misinform. They wouldn't want people knowing our real stance, it just makes too much sense.
Click to expand...

If people knew the real stance they might actually agree with you?

That would scare the hell out of the two major parties.
 
Topspin said:
where did I say they didn't have the right.
I said I don't want to invest in a union company and most investors don't as well.
Click to expand...

I know, but I'm just saying its normal and should be embraced by investors, rather than discouraged. Unfortunatly, what happens is government always feels a need to fix something that isn't broken, and the pendulum swings too far and it gets lopsided. Unions held a lot of power the last few decades, and still has a lot of power in certain places, which should scare investors. It should have never been that way, however. There really shouldn't be this 'dilema'.
 
DigitalDave said:
I know, but I'm just saying its normal and should be embraced by investors, rather than discouraged. Unfortunatly, what happens is government always feels a need to fix something that isn't broken, and the pendulum swings too far and it gets lopsided. Unions held a lot of power the last few decades, and still has a lot of power in certain places, which should scare investors. It should have never been that way, however. There really shouldn't be this 'dilema'.
Click to expand...

that's comical thanks, should be?

Airlines, Automakers, what do these shitty investments have in common.
Unions
 
Topspin said:
that's comical thanks, should be?

Airlines, Automakers, what do these shitty investments have in common.
Unions
Click to expand...

Like I said, the pendulum swung too far. Those industries were stuck and had to use unions. In a normal functioning society where unions are just organized workers, and not government backed job security programs, things would have been a lot more fair. Investors should have no problem supporting a strong workforce for the company.
 
DigitalDave said:
Like I said, the pendulum swung too far. Those industries were stuck and had to use unions. In a normal functioning society where unions are just organized workers, and not government backed job security programs, things would have been a lot more fair. Investors should have no problem supporting a strong workforce for the company.
Click to expand...
He doesn't understand the concept of "If the government hadn't become involved..."
 
what I understand is good companies pay good workers well. It's as if you tools think only a union worker can get good pay and wages.
 
Topspin said:
what I understand is good companies pay good workers well. It's as if you tools think only a union worker can get good pay and wages.
Click to expand...

A group of union workers work out a fair wage with their employer so they are happy, and the employer is happy. Non-union shops can do the same thing, but there is less power behind the individual ensuring he/she is happy. A Good company will also try and save money wherever they can....
 
Topspin said:
what I understand is good companies pay good workers well. It's as if you tools think only a union worker can get good pay and wages.
Click to expand...
Nobody said that. You are arguing a totally different concept. I prefer not to be in any union, but that doesn't mean I think that unions are all 'teh eviiil'. Over time people began to believe that they were protection for lazy workers, and some are...

Competition, however, allows for both types of companies and if you prefer not to invest in a company because of unions while another chooses companies based on different criteria that is how a market works. The problem is when the government becomes involved, tipping the scales in favor of one over the other (company or union) and removes the competitive nature of the market.
 
DigitalDave said:
A group of union workers work out a fair wage with their employer so they are happy, and the employer is happy. Non-union shops can do the same thing, but there is less power behind the individual ensuring he/she is happy. A Good company will also try and save money wherever they can....
Click to expand...

unionized workers have less incentive to excell, I'm shocked you don't see this.
Again as a worker I'd love a union.
As an investor stay away like the plaque.:clink:
 
Damocles said:
Nobody said that. You are arguing a totally different concept. I prefer not to be in any union, but that doesn't mean I think that unions are all 'teh eviiil'. Over time people began to believe that they were protection for lazy workers, and some are...

Competition, however, allows for both types of companies and if you prefer not to invest in a company because of unions while another chooses companies based on different criteria that is how a market works. The problem is when the government becomes involved, tipping the scales in favor of one over the other (company or union) and removes the competitive nature of the market.
Click to expand...

I agree with everything you said in princible.
Please tell me a huge company with many union employess that's a great investment?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top