The Impact of Unions

TheDawn said:
Unions were only effective in countering the "externalities" sometimes posed by laissez-faire free market capitalism such as exploitation of child labour, destruction of workers' welfare in the quest for minimizing cost but once these externalities are resolved or mitigated to a satisfactory level, the usefulness of unions are really limited. And not only that, unions are now becoming a barrier of trade almost hindering the working of the market economy and suppression of quality and innovation for mediocrity. But this is not limited to just unions, any measures such as government regulations, environmental measures and etc. adopted to counter any externalities not being able to be resolved or resolved effectively by the mechanisms of the market economy all have the same limitation as unions; their effectiveness is only limited to the point of resolving and mitigating the externalities not resolvable by the mechanism of the market economy. Beyond that, they become a hindrance.
More...
That's putting too much faith in the so called free market, a term used by business to keep government regulators an arms length distance away from its practices. Business has gone out of its way to finance political parties and politicians to ensure that distance remains, and the US economy is filled with self regulating companies with almost no oversight. In the US, business is the core of society, protected on one hand by a strong military and weak government, and fed on the other hand by a large population eager to consume. One may wonder why we have any elections at all when business is king.

I generally prefer the European models, where The People elect government and hold it accountable for carrying the goals and aspirations of a society all wrapped up in ethics and morals rooted or not in religion. Business plays an important role but always within government parameters that are often precise, both in scope and operational roll out.
This isn't to say that the European model is perfect, far from it, and I could write a litany of complaints about its excessive regulatory framework, the outsize influence of unions, or endemic unemployment. I believe the US could benefit from elements of the European model and Europe from the US model.
 
deaddog said:
For sure... Canada too!!
I find it hard to believe that Europe is different. Your polititions aren't bought and paid for?
More...
You're a bit cynical, but not far from reality. In the US, anyone and any entity can finance political parties and specific politicians, either overtly or covertly. Thus begins the race for money to spend on the election race. Political parties and individual politicians cater to those who fund them, the special interest groups who represent businesses, industries, causes, etc.

In Europe, France in particular, political parties represent a spectrum of the electorate (true multi party system). They are financed by the state, based on legislative electoral results and number of representatives in the Senate. Financial gift can only be made by individuals to individual politicians (not the party) and their financing is managed by a 3rd party independent entity. During elections, equal time is strictly allotted in the media to present their ideas and political platform. There's a political black out 48h before the election.
Does this mean politics are clean in France? No. Every generation uncovers a scandal which leads to stricter rules. In particular, dark political financing comes from government contracts abroad in which kickbacks are funnelled back to the party. But this is relatively insignificant when compared to US politics.
 
VicBee said:
I believe the US could benefit from elements of the European model and Europe from the US model.
More...

For the very first time, I agree with you. No model is perfect. There is always room for improvement if different models complemented each other.

But overall though, I would still lean a little bit more on the side of laissez-faire market economy. I believe the market does have its way of sorting things out ensuring the good and weeding out the bad. It's just that sometimes it takes a bit longer and it's always on an ad-hoc basis but then again so are government regulations. Bernie Madoff's ponzi scheme was not discovered earlier in Europe even though more money poured into Madoff's scheme from Europe than from the US. Different places are dictated by different mechanisms due to perhaps cultural differences. There is always somebody that's above the law, above the people, above the government which is chosen by the people. If you believe it's the businesses that are above the government, in Europe it's the aristocratic elite, the "name" and everything that comes with it.
 
TheDawn said:
For the very first time, I agree with you. No model is perfect. There is always room for improvement if different models complemented each other.

But overall though, I would still lean a little bit more on the side of laissez-faire market economy. I believe the market does have its way of sorting things out ensuring the good and weeding out the bad. It's just that sometimes it takes a bit longer and it's always on an ad-hoc basis but then again so are government regulations. Bernie Madoff's ponzi scheme was not discovered earlier in Europe even though more money poured into Madoff's scheme from Europe than from the US. Different places are dictated by different mechanisms due to perhaps cultural differences. There is always somebody that's above the law, above the people, above the government which is chosen by the people. If you believe it's the businesses that are above the government, in Europe it's the aristocratic elite, the "name" and everything that comes with it.
More...
I lean towards the European model and take the environmental crisis as an example.

European citizens are pushing their respective governments to do something. Governments from individual nations and then as a group under the EU government set rules born out of the Paris Accords, itself based on scientific evidence that we must act to cut global emissions.
Unlike in the US where corporate interests and their lobbies start spinning challenges to the scientific evidence and finance the only opposition party and politicians to side with them, in Europe policy makers go beyond business interests which are one of their constituents but not the main one, voting citizens are their main prerogative.
As a consequence, the EU voted to end the sale of ICE vehicles by 2035 and set rules to ensure charging stations are everywhere. Businesses then operate within the parameters of their respective governments, within the EU framework.
In the US, the issue has been taken away from the sciences and politicized into a mayhem of directives, lawsuits, contradictory state and federal policies, etc. which are sure to delay or even halt the transition from ICE to EV depending on where one lives. This is no freedom, it's anarchy planned by those businesses affected by the transition, from oil, gaz and coal, and gaz stations, garages, auto manufacturers, parts manufacturers who all stand to lose.
It's important to recognize that businesses do not have citizens' welfare as their goal (and shouldn't ). Theirs is to make more money for the company to grow, for stockholders to invest, for executives to get handsomely rewarded. That's fine. But We the People don't elect them, we elect our government and should expect it to abide by the wishes of those who vote them in without undue influence from the business community.
 
VicBee said:
I lean towards the European model and take the environmental crisis as an example.

European citizens are pushing their respective governments to do something. Governments from individual nations and then as a group under the EU government set rules born out of the Paris Accords, itself based on scientific evidence that we must act to cut global emissions.
Unlike in the US where corporate interests and their lobbies start spinning challenges to the scientific evidence and finance the only opposition party and politicians to side with them, in Europe policy makers go beyond business interests which are one of their constituents but not the main one, voting citizens are their main prerogative.
As a consequence, the EU voted to end the sale of ICE vehicles by 2035 and set rules to ensure charging stations are everywhere. Businesses then operate within the parameters of their respective governments, within the EU framework.
In the US, the issue has been taken away from the sciences and politicized into a mayhem of directives, lawsuits, contradictory state and federal policies, etc. which are sure to delay or even halt the transition from ICE to EV depending on where one lives. This is no freedom, it's anarchy planned by those businesses affected by the transition, from oil, gaz and coal, and gaz stations, garages, auto manufacturers, parts manufacturers who all stand to lose.
It's important to recognize that businesses do not have citizens' welfare as their goal (and shouldn't ). Theirs is to make more money for the company to grow, for stockholders to invest, for executives to get handsomely rewarded. That's fine. But We the People don't elect them, we elect our government and should expect it to abide by the wishes of those who vote them in without undue influence from the business community.
More...

Actually everything, even in Europe is dictated by the market economy and the businesses. It's just more subtle and to a lesser degree. I will give you an example. In France, it is mandated that all employees must leave the office to have lunch outside of the office otherwise the employer can be sued if any employees are found to be eating at their desk in the office during lunch time. That to me is clearly driven by business lobbying. Joie de vivre and having work/life balance is one thing but putting into law forcing people to go outside to have lunch is clearly the work of the powerful restaurant industry in France lobbying the government to create business opportunities for them sacrificing individual freedom and choice even when it comes to eating. If you want to talk about politicizing, it exists everywhere.

To me, market economy means freedom and choice. I don't want the government dictating to me either as a business or a consumer whether I can or cannot do something. If it's not worth it, as a business owner I would not offer it and as a consumer, if it's worth it, I will buy it. The government can create regulations to protect vulnerable groups such as the under-age minors, the infirmed and the elderly but if I am an adult of sound mind, I want to be able to make my own decision.
 
Last edited:
SunTrader said:
See low skilled service industry workers for poor union members. Dock workers nowadays are skilled.

It's always been said, go to school or learn a trade. Ya wanna penalize them for that? Or do you believe only doctors and lawyers are supposed to make the big bucks?
More...

:rolleyes:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top