RedBull
Registered
Today's Action with Police Involvement at a school
- Thread starter c10
- Start date
Mr Brown
Registered
That's
Regarding this country there are a couple of issues: A strong economy doesn't necessarily equate to better working conditions, profit is the indicator most often used and depressing wages increases margins.
Industry didn't leave the US due to unionization of the workforce, it left because there was an opportunity to substantially increase profit margins by doing so.
Capitalism as practiced here in the USA is capitalism in name only. The market is protected from failure, that my friend is socialism. Tax payer bailouts? Welfare. The farm bill? Welfare. Tax breaks for corporate entities? Welfare. The industrialist class in this country has been protected by the government since its inception.
In your experience I'm sure that the idea of value is true, however your experience is as a corporate officer rather than a member of the rank and file. From a corporate perspective, labor is a commodity, to be leveraged like any other. The problem with that position is that labor consists of human beings not inanimate objects.
To the part about other countries, I don't disagree with your position.
Regarding this country there are a couple of issues: A strong economy doesn't necessarily equate to better working conditions, profit is the indicator most often used and depressing wages increases margins.
Industry didn't leave the US due to unionization of the workforce, it left because there was an opportunity to substantially increase profit margins by doing so.
Capitalism as practiced here in the USA is capitalism in name only. The market is protected from failure, that my friend is socialism. Tax payer bailouts? Welfare. The farm bill? Welfare. Tax breaks for corporate entities? Welfare. The industrialist class in this country has been protected by the government since its inception.
In your experience I'm sure that the idea of value is true, however your experience is as a corporate officer rather than a member of the rank and file. From a corporate perspective, labor is a commodity, to be leveraged like any other. The problem with that position is that labor consists of human beings not inanimate objects.
Dougyp333
Registered
It is the rare soul that puts others first. It always has been and always will be about power (and money). Without the drive for power (whatever form it takes) people don't accomplish great things. What's the point of the effort if it doesn't afford you the opportunity of wealth, fame, power, etc.
Many institutions are supposed to be above that, think Church, unions, the government but I think we can all agree that they have been corrupt/corrupted.
Every single thing a person does is motivated by a personal gain/reward. A generous person, like so many on this board, feels good after helping someone out. That is their reward. Understand the motivations of a person and it will tell you a lot about them.
Many institutions are supposed to be above that, think Church, unions, the government but I think we can all agree that they have been corrupt/corrupted.
Every single thing a person does is motivated by a personal gain/reward. A generous person, like so many on this board, feels good after helping someone out. That is their reward. Understand the motivations of a person and it will tell you a lot about them.
Power and greed is the problem. Capitalism, pure "strong survive" has never, ever worked. Somehow, we need to attach equity to the labor workers give to building great companies. As a business owner also, we always say that our business is it's people, right up until we split the profits. What we are doing now is not sustainable. A thousand sheep will overwhelm the lone wolf.
We built the F150 here in SE Va. The factory was the highest quality, highest profit Ford factory in the country. They closed it and moved south of the border. This is not about low wages, it's about the worker's equity in the product (pensions).
Unions are the worker's only way to protect their interests in the value they add to a company. Either the society has to lay a safety net or the companies have to pay their fair share of the worker's equity. I'm not in a union and I work in an industry well know to abuse it's workers. But the right path is obvious.
We built the F150 here in SE Va. The factory was the highest quality, highest profit Ford factory in the country. They closed it and moved south of the border. This is not about low wages, it's about the worker's equity in the product (pensions).
Unions are the worker's only way to protect their interests in the value they add to a company. Either the society has to lay a safety net or the companies have to pay their fair share of the worker's equity. I'm not in a union and I work in an industry well know to abuse it's workers. But the right path is obvious.
Johnnie Phatt
Registered
I have been both a Union and Non Union worker with in the same company . I was well treated both times. I have spent a lot of time travelling in and about Coal country. While picking up and delivering in Coal country over almost 50 years. I can say with a moments hesitation before the unions got involved, and to be honest even since to a lesser extent, i was very glad not to be a coal miner.
Have some unions become industries unto them selves? Probably. However when you think of the magnitude of some of the industries they take on they need to swing similar influence to the companies they are up against
Have some unions become industries unto them selves? Probably. However when you think of the magnitude of some of the industries they take on they need to swing similar influence to the companies they are up against
Mathewrussell52
Registered
People don’t have to be a sheep they can be the wolf. I would never own a business I would never want the risk or responsibly. 90% prob feel the same way. Their has to be a risk reward. Equity when a great business is built what’s their cost when it fails. Splitting profits is a great idea. When the company wants to invest do the employees pay for it?
Do you think the safety nets America has now is enough? Are you suggesting we get rid of all government help and dictate that the responsibility of a employer as in pensions instead of the current system now taxes? The reason pensions just don’t work any more people live to long after they retire.
Why haven’t a single Mcdoanlds been organized as a Union yet. One of the lowest wage and lowest benefit jobs out there. These gracious unions that are only out to only help the people have spent hundreds of millions of dollars trying. They don’t want one with 70 employees. No $$ in that. They want the whole thing 19 million dues paying members.
Unions are a business nothing else. Do they help some people of course. Back in the day with unsafe work environments when people were dying. Now the government does that through regulations and OSHA.
When a Union is formed what do you think the first thing is negotiated????
Taking dues out of payroll!
Why do people that work for a Union have their own Union.
Do you think the safety nets America has now is enough? Are you suggesting we get rid of all government help and dictate that the responsibility of a employer as in pensions instead of the current system now taxes? The reason pensions just don’t work any more people live to long after they retire.
Why haven’t a single Mcdoanlds been organized as a Union yet. One of the lowest wage and lowest benefit jobs out there. These gracious unions that are only out to only help the people have spent hundreds of millions of dollars trying. They don’t want one with 70 employees. No $$ in that. They want the whole thing 19 million dues paying members.
Unions are a business nothing else. Do they help some people of course. Back in the day with unsafe work environments when people were dying. Now the government does that through regulations and OSHA.
When a Union is formed what do you think the first thing is negotiated????
Taking dues out of payroll!
Why do people that work for a Union have their own Union.
I walked the whole path, did not fly into a little comfortable corporate nest from the top. I have been apprentice, labor, supervision, manager and much later VP. So my perspective may differ from your perception.
Profit margins and unionization unfortunately had a very big influence here, especially GM. They go hand in hand and made many of our manufacturing industries non-competitive.
Anyone who has worked and done extensive business overseas will differ with your opinion about capitalism as practiced in the US.
Also, for those of us who still get our hands dirty, there is a whole different economy in small business which is largely unregulated. Best example is go spend time with a small one man GC building contractor who does custom homes. It is capitalism to the endth degree, where management and labor is the same thing.
Mr Brown
Registered
I'm not suggesting you flew anywhere, but
your corporate perspective is articulated from the management end of the spectrum, which where my comment originates. Unionization didn't drive manufacturing overseas, if that were true, prices would have dropped as labor costs did. They obviously didn't. GM and both the other US automakers spent many years making substandard products in a protected market, and foundered when trade restrictions were lifted allowing the Asian countries to compete.
Capitalism is an economic system, not a political one. It operates on principles which are dictated by the market, not government. That is not what is practiced here, regardless of what country one compares it to. That's not my opinion, that is fact.
Of course small business is regulated. The contractor you describe has to be licensed and insured at very least. Its not capitalism. Small business doesn't stand a chance in a true free market. They can't take advantage of the economy of scale. That's why we have anti-trust laws.
This could be a long conversation, probably a different thread a different time. If you are suggesting we should have no reference point for comparing capitalism and it is a pure definition destroyed by regulation then we are not on the same page.
Having a contractor licensed is against capitalism?
Economies of scale, I use to do $11,000 per minute out of one factory, among several. But then there is the corporate overhead and all the indirect costs associated with a fortune 10 company and the union and abuse of workers comp etc., etc. There is tremendous opportunity for small business with hard work.
Today I am retired and I make money out of my hobby when I feel like it. As a one man show, I do cabinets for high end residences. My costs for an average 4,000 sq ft home is approximately 1/5th that of a large contractor using pre-fab units. It takes me around 4 to 5 weeks and my prices are 3/4 that of the big guy no prefab, furniture grade. The profit is handsome, do your math on a $60,000 job and explain to me the economies of scale? A large portion of the labor in this business is underground, all the sub needs is insurance. There is no employment contract in most cases no medical insurance no comp no regulation. It’s a buddy system you have not been exposed to. How do you think all the illegals survive here and live well?
Finally, what do you think the consequences would have been if there was no bail-out during the credit crunch based on pure economics and cash flow drying up?
From a union perspective we will probably always have opposing opinions, based on our life experiences. It was a long time ago, but I spent four weeks with Toyota in Japan. Back then the PhD and the no college education candidates straight of school start their careers at the same level. Everything was measured by performance metrics and 60% of compensation was based on bonus related to output. If the PhD could use his education as an advantage in output, he would be ahead. Otherwise not. Try and do that in a factory with a well established union, opposing TPM and autonomous maintenance where there is job protection and an employee may not add value outside of his allowed activities. Compare that to job advancement due to seniority rather than merit. Then analyze how it affects head count, output, productivity and total manufacturing costs. Do a comparison of non-conformance costs.
How do I know this? For the same organization some of my factories were unionized, some were not. The comparison was easy.
I think you have to look at this sort of academically first, then look at the dirty details. There is a lot that Unions improved. For example, the 40 hour work week and 2 weeks of vacation. Without a union the worker is alone and without power. Owners are predators by nature - that's an entrepreneur's role in a capitalist system.
Business used to pay the equity debt owed the worker through pensions. They didn't do this out of the goodness of their hearts. Happy workers with money were loyal customers and that is what built the greatest economy the world has yet to know. In truth, Henry Ford's real contribution was not mass production, it was creating middle class consumers. However when this started to get expensive due to people living longer with expectations of better healthcare, the government stepped in with social security. So businesses stopped having to pay the equity to the workers and that came out of the taxpayer's pocket - not the company's.
So here is the academic side of this: Money and greed are insanely effective motivators. Hence, capitalism. Capitalism needs a market. Pay people decent money and they will spend that money. Raise people's standard of living and the bottom limit rises also. If a significant number of people fall below that raised bottom limit, you have destabilization - the enemy of capitalism. So capitalism is war by other means, if I may turn a phrase. A capitalist system is always out of balance, always correcting itself. These are the "correcting" systems that our version of capitalism is built on:
1. Supply and demand. Factories make stuff people want to buy. Funny, I read somewhere that less than 30% of our economy goes to things we need, most goes to things we want. So this screws around with the metering effectiveness of supply and demand.
2. The government provides incentives to point the engines of capitalism in a sustainable direction. This is primarily done with tax policy (that's why you can write-off some of your mortgage interest) but also trade policies like tariffs. This is the problem with the current President's policy on tariffs. Yes, we get the short end on many trade relationships, but those deals were made to balance our economic might when dealing with smaller economies - you can't take tariffs in isolation. Our economy needs markets in Europe and Asia to continue growing. Those countries are not going to let is in to control their markets so unequal trade relationships are the cost of playing in those markets.
3. The government maintains an even playing field (law enforcement).
4. Unions protect the workers. Remember, the majority of our economy depends on you and me buying stuff. So protecting workers is essentially protecting the market.
So, have Unions over stepped their mandate? Absolutely. But you can't just get rid of them because they are part of a system - you have to fix them. When government regulation gets out of control you can just go laissez faire, you have to fix it.
That's where we have to dive into the dirty details.
Business used to pay the equity debt owed the worker through pensions. They didn't do this out of the goodness of their hearts. Happy workers with money were loyal customers and that is what built the greatest economy the world has yet to know. In truth, Henry Ford's real contribution was not mass production, it was creating middle class consumers. However when this started to get expensive due to people living longer with expectations of better healthcare, the government stepped in with social security. So businesses stopped having to pay the equity to the workers and that came out of the taxpayer's pocket - not the company's.
So here is the academic side of this: Money and greed are insanely effective motivators. Hence, capitalism. Capitalism needs a market. Pay people decent money and they will spend that money. Raise people's standard of living and the bottom limit rises also. If a significant number of people fall below that raised bottom limit, you have destabilization - the enemy of capitalism. So capitalism is war by other means, if I may turn a phrase. A capitalist system is always out of balance, always correcting itself. These are the "correcting" systems that our version of capitalism is built on:
1. Supply and demand. Factories make stuff people want to buy. Funny, I read somewhere that less than 30% of our economy goes to things we need, most goes to things we want. So this screws around with the metering effectiveness of supply and demand.
2. The government provides incentives to point the engines of capitalism in a sustainable direction. This is primarily done with tax policy (that's why you can write-off some of your mortgage interest) but also trade policies like tariffs. This is the problem with the current President's policy on tariffs. Yes, we get the short end on many trade relationships, but those deals were made to balance our economic might when dealing with smaller economies - you can't take tariffs in isolation. Our economy needs markets in Europe and Asia to continue growing. Those countries are not going to let is in to control their markets so unequal trade relationships are the cost of playing in those markets.
3. The government maintains an even playing field (law enforcement).
4. Unions protect the workers. Remember, the majority of our economy depends on you and me buying stuff. So protecting workers is essentially protecting the market.
So, have Unions over stepped their mandate? Absolutely. But you can't just get rid of them because they are part of a system - you have to fix them. When government regulation gets out of control you can just go laissez faire, you have to fix it.
That's where we have to dive into the dirty details.
Mathewrussell52
Registered
So odd how business are viewed and the villain. And a different BUSINESS that pretends to care about people a Union is so great. It’s the same thing other than the Union don’t employ people they take their $$. Just like government. But some people think that’s everyone saving grace also...
busabobh
Registered
I’m a union man, and proud of it and my union. I’ve been in construction over 40 years. We like our contractors and do our best to take care of them, without them we are dead. We negotiated a total amount of money and out of that we pay our own pension, and healthcare. There are no
Paid holidays, no vacations, nothing! We train our own men, on our dime, we even train new contractors. It’s a good relationship, our biggest problem comes from our own members who start companies and go nonunion taking advantage of those they hire. We have committees made up of members and contractors to over see all programs and funds.
Paid holidays, no vacations, nothing! We train our own men, on our dime, we even train new contractors. It’s a good relationship, our biggest problem comes from our own members who start companies and go nonunion taking advantage of those they hire. We have committees made up of members and contractors to over see all programs and funds.
Mr Brown
Registered
Capitalism is a concept, an economic system. Pure capitalism allows the market to dictate everything, that is not how it is applied in this country.
No, but capitalism doesn't provide for regulation. A contractor license is a form of regulation.
And the company you worked for was able to purchase items at far deeper discounts than what a small business could. That is how economy of scale advantages big business.....
If a person circumvents regulations then they are cheating the system, and all bets are off. The comparison is only valid if it is a comparison of how things are supposed to work, not how well they can be taken advantage of.
I think that the bailout was necessary, but my point is that a bailout is counter to the economic system favored by the people it benefited. It is socialism, not capitalism. The anti-regulation folks sure are glad someone was there to provide them a safety net. Hypocrisy in action.....
Mr Brown
Registered
It would appear so. Unions are both necessary and effective, when formed and utilized correctly.
Organizations see labor as a commodity, skilled labor as a more valuable one. Seniority based advancement hinges on the idea that those who have been there the longest are the most valued because they have acquired the largets skill set. It is a common position of weak management to blame poor labor relations on a union, but organizational theory will teach you that a certain percentage of any workforce will be shirkers, unionized or not. There are many factors which contribute to organizational success, or lack thereof.
Respectfully, that is oversimplifying things a bit I believe. There are other factors involved in that comparison, such as location, culture, wages, benefits, employee pool etc.
Last edited:
Mr Brown
Registered
Agreed.
And they they found ways to reduce their own tax burden and transfer this resposibility squarely on the employees.
I disagree that a capitalist system is always out of balance. It is always balances, it jsut isn't always equal.
Supply and demand has nothing to do with need. An artifical demand (a want) is still a demand.
And this steering of capiatlism is what makes it a modified version. Goverment interference in the market is not capitalism. The market dictates everything....
Where's that dead horse emoji?
Unions are interference too. A market driven economy would allow the businesses that don't take care of their workers to fail. No interference needed. Downside is that people would die....
Again, I agree. I just wish that people would stop calling the economic system in this country capitalism, it isn't, and those who are advantaged by it don't want it to be.
Mr Brown
Registered
Every organiztion exists to further its own existence. The difference is in how they do that. Private companies report to owners and/or sharholders, public organizations to their stakeholders. Once a union shifts focus from protecting members to protecting it's own employees, it will take a different approach. The term non-profit doesn't mean revenue negative, it is supposed to mean that any revenue generated is put back into the organization to increase effectiveness. Allowing for operating overhead, the members of the union should see the revenue used to make their representation more effective.
Last edited:
Similar threads
