America owes it's standard of living & it's marketplace to unions. Workers benefits were unheard of until unions came along. All that has separated us from the work camps overseas came about through unions.

 

And yet in the global economy there is no room for unions. They continue to be marginalized here & abroad with each passing year. Not even government employee unions can stop it because fed, state, & local governments continue to outsource clerical jobs overseas.

 

Oh sure you can continue to hope & pray that the WTO & UN can work diplomacy to bring out worker's rights for all nations but don't expect them to listen. I laugh at the many years unions have backed the democrats in order to stem the tide. What did it ge them? Absolutely nothing. Had they backed the GOP they might have at least had the ability to strengthen the non global voice that exists there. The movers & shakers in the GOP are not all tried-and-true capitalists willing to sell all that America has worked hard to gain for short-term proifts. I don't know if the same can be said of the Dems.

 

Make no mistake about it. We are in Iraq because capitalists want us to be there.

They see profitability there & we won't leave until they get their profits. The war means nothing to them. Establishing a thriving Baghdad Exchange means everything. That means more than democracy, the war, peace, or anything else to them.

 

Ok, I said my peace. Agree or disagree. Hide your head in the sand for all I care

& pretend none of this is happening. It's not going to change the realization that America's trade deficit continues to grow & benefits paid to American workers continues to diminish. Not even pensions are safe.

Make no mistake about it. We are in Iraq because capitalists want us to be there.

They see profitability there & we won't leave until they get their profits. The war means nothing to them. Establishing a thriving Baghdad Exchange means everything. That means more than democracy, the war, peace, or anything else to them.

 

That much I agree with. That's also why the GDP has been 4% despite the escalating energy costs...

That much I agree with.  That's also why the GDP has been 4% despite the escalating energy costs...

The federal reserve has said that energy prices have created a drag of about 1-1.5% on GDP growth. That being said we're not doing too badly.

If you disagree then please explain why. Without the formation of unions & collective bargaining agreements in the world's fastest growing economies what is going to lead to an improve in worker's pay, rights, benefits, & conditions so that American can protect what she has built in the last century?

If you disagree then please explain why.  Without the formation of unions & collective bargaining agreements in the world's fastest growing economies what is going to lead to an improve in worker's pay, rights, benefits, & conditions so that American can protect what she has built in the last century?

What led to unions in the first place? Supply and Demand. When labor becomes essential enough to the economy in the country, labor will get their reward. It is basic Macro.

What led to unions in the first place?  Supply and Demand.  When labor becomes essential enough to the economy in the country, labor will get their reward.  It is basic Macro.

S&D did NOT lead to labor unions. Collective bargaining did. The economic theory of CB led to legislative action which helped solidify & encourage the growth of unions.

It was also a path that was dug out through blood & money. A heavy price was paid.

Too heavy to let it just fall asunder.

 

That is quickly being deteriorated in the wake a global economy where the primary engine of production are regions controlled by communist China.

 

There is some hope though. It's never too late for the US to start over if it should default. The deficit is financed by those who invest in US Treasuries. If it grew beyond our GDP & we defaulted we could always declare bankruptcy since those notes are governed by US laws. Like all great superpowers that have come before us we must be defeated either in battle or through revolution. It's not going to happen through economics alone.

S&D did NOT lead to labor unions.  Collective bargaining did.  The economic theory of CB led to legislative action which helped solidify & encourage the growth of unions.

It was also a path that was dug out through blood & money.  A heavy price was paid.

Too heavy to let it just fall asunder.

 

That is quickly being deteriorated in the wake a global economy where the primary engine of production are regions controlled by communist China.

 

There is some hope though.  It's never too late for the US to start over if it should default.  The deficit is financed by those who invest in US Treasuries.  If it grew beyond our GDP & we defaulted we could always declare bankruptcy since those notes are governed by US laws.  Like all great superpowers that have come before us we must be defeated either in battle or through revolution. It's not going to happen through economics alone.

Supply and Demand absolutely led to collective bargining. When labor became too vital and important to be denied, that is when CB began to take strength. When labor was easily replacible, there was no need to care about the employees, as you could grab more labor easily at anytime. In the 19th century when labor became vital to the American economy, that is when unions and labor laws began to be enacted. The timing is no coincidense.

Whatever "caused" unions in this country is beside the point today. You can thank the unions for every benefit you receive today. Those benefits are slowly being whittled away, however. From Reagan and the air traffic controller strike, through the present, the unions have been losing ground. Unions did get too big and too powerful for a while (see Jimmy Hoffa), but the tide has turned in favor of management. It's time the pendulum starts to swing back the other way.

Agreed.

 

And there are things you can do to turn the tide. Like shopping at stores that allow union representation over stores that don't.

Whatever "caused" unions in this country is beside the point today.

No, it's very relevant to Jug's question, which has to do with unions in developing countries, not the US.

 

This movement against capitalism is the worst, most counter-productive aspect of liberalism today. Suppose the developing world had strong unions, that demanded $5/hr and weekends off. US companies would pull out of there so fast your head would spin -- cheap labor is the ONLY advantage of countries with bad infrastructure and corruption. These particular jobs would disappear from the developing world.

 

Of course, products in the US would become more expensive. But think about the developing countries -- remember that in the developing world "unemployed" is not a very meaningful word. If you lose your job, you do whatever you can (somehow, you always work) to feed yourself and your family. Those kids working in sweatshops would not walk out of the factory, into the classroom -- they'd go to the fields, some into prostitution. A lot of people would return to subsistence farming, which is much less lucrative and much less steady -- starvation is a lot closer than in the factory.

 

How exactly is this good? Don't you ever question why these jobs are so popular?

 

Why won't unions start now? B/c there are gobs of people in developing countries that worry about food for tomorrow, not next month or retirement. In a situation like that, who would give a f about being called a scab? Would your picket-line show, or would they be doing something to see that their kids eat? When the countries have sufficient wealth (or at least, income is more dependable/stable), and decent social networks to support out-of-work individuals, then you may see unions. The best way to get to that point is more-or-less unfettered capitalism (the same way the US got there -- although some basic safety standards can and should be implemented). Withdrawing capital and telling them to fend for themselves is the best way to totally screw the developing world.