Wisconsin Takes A Stand For Fiscal Sanity

[DaShi]

How delightfully absurd! Do carry on.

[Wezil]

Back to the topic -

Do the unions prefer layoffs over the proposed legislation?

I'm hearing April 1 as the date.

[KrazyHorse]

Given that the last three pages have focused on

a) whether or not Paul Krugman is a liar
b) whether or not Fox news lies
c) Public opinion polls about who people dislike the most

I'm going to assume that the substantive issue about the fact that unions exist to raise the compensation of workers above their marginal product has been settled

[notyoueither]

Although they may do that in some cases (I think you're saying they exist to have workers paid more than they are worth) I don't think so.

I think that industry and capital can suck it. They have options. They can (and do) move production from plant to plant and place to place. There are answers to union monopolies on labour in many (or most) cases as it turns out that unions do not usually have such a monopoly.

[Aeson]

Unions exist to get more out of companies, companies exist to get more out of their workers and consumers... they all can vote or throw money at politicians... clearly it's all working as intended as far as "greed is good".

[SlowwHand]

Any sympathies that I might have had for Wisconsin unions are evaporated. Michael Moore has offered his support. Fat ass scumbag.

[Aeson]

Michael Moore fat ass: 586,000 results
Michael Moore lies: 4,950,000 results
Michael Moore sex: 18,300,000 results

I'm not sure what Google is trying to tell us here...

[DaShi]

Any sympathies that I might have had for Wisconsin unions are evaporated. Michael Moore has offered his support. Fat ass scumbag.

For political insight like this, visit www.theslowwhandfactor.com

[Jon Miller]

There can't be that many, otherwise Michael Moore would be offering his support for the Tea Party.

JM

[KrazyHorse]

Although they may do that in some cases (I think you're saying they exist to have workers paid more than they are worth) I don't think so.

I think that industry and capital can suck it. They have options. They can (and do) move production from plant to plant and place to place. There are answers to union monopolies on labour in many (or most) cases as it turns out that unions do not usually have such a monopoly.

This is pretty much the level of answer I've come to expect from you.

[KrazyHorse]

Unions exist to get more out of companies, companies exist to get more out of their workers and consumers... they all can vote or throw money at politicians... clearly it's all working as intended as far as "greed is good".

Confusing the intent with the effect is extremely naive. Unions have extracted legal rights which drastically limit entry to their markets.

[SlowwHand]

Industry and capital "sucking it" pretty much assures that the union worker will suck it, too.

[Jon Miller]

http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2011/03/middle-class_stagnation?fsrc=scn%2Ffb%2Fwl%2Fbl%2Fcanadianunionisationandclasswar

This might not be anything to consider for some, but upon reading it it made me think, so I post it here.

JM

[notyoueither]

This is pretty much the level of answer I've come to expect from you.

You were supposed to rant and rave.

*disappointment

[Aeson]

Confusing the intent with the effect is extremely naive. Unions have extracted legal rights which drastically limit entry to their markets.

Just more whining about "fairness". The political "market" is used by everyone to advance their own interests. Some do a better job of it than others. Why should we care about the losers who can't compete?