I had no idea Scott Walker was so popular

[Fake Boris]

Hardly. Those restrictions have far more teeth than you imagine. And even so capital OBSERVABLY avoids areas with tight labor regulations and/or strong unions in favor of regions with lax regulations and weak or nonexistent unions. This is a great argument for getting rid of unions!

It also tends to look for places that turn tax dollars into corporate handouts.

[Fake Boris]

Brilliant! You've demonstrated that if we get rid of collective bargaining, workers won't be able to collectively bargain!

Collective bargaining for corporations = suppressing strikes in blood

[Kuciwalker]

Why is it cheaper than firing anyone who complains and just hiring another person desperate for a job?

Do you imagine that companies would be able to get away with paying arbitrarily small wages? We have direct evidence even in this economy that people aren't willing to work for wages much lower than what are already prevailing, and would prefer to be unemployed. As an example, Alabama recently had a harsh crackdown on illegal immigrants. Since then, many farmers have been letting their fields lay fallow because they simply cannot hire American laborers at the wages that would make it profitable. Even with high unemployment, the employers don't have an unlimited ability to dictate wages and working conditions.

How do you get a new job when a) there are no other local jobs and you can't afford to move and b) other employers are doing the same?

You are suggesting that ALL the employers would somehow form a cartel and refuse to bid up wages for workers they needed?

There are lots of jobs that don't face any protections at all, and somehow those jobs pay pretty good wages and offer pretty good benefits for OK working hours and conditions. How does your theory of the world, where employers will mercilessly bid down wages to zero if we let them, account for this fact?

I can't comment on your job without knowing anything about it, but it seems unlikely that it has no protections at all in this day and age.

I am, thank god, a salaried employee with effectively no labor protections whatsoever. I can be fired at-will. I can be asked to work whatever hours the firm needs - and I have been. And I would be really, really angry if the government tried to interfere with any of that.

[Fake Boris]

We all understand this Kuci.

Still, your earlier statement about union - what you called their "sole reason of existence" was just completely off-base and paranoid.

[Kuciwalker]

No. That is what unions do. They restrict supply in order to increase prices. It's only possible to increase prices by restricting supply.

[Fake Boris]

This is what they do, but they also do other things.

Imagine that I told you: "Neoliberalism exists to destroy the environment".

[Fake Boris]

Also what do you mean by "they restrict supply"? Wouldn't the correct thing to say be that they increase prices, thus reducing demand?

[Kuciwalker]

This is what they do, but they also do other things.

Imagine that I told you: "Neoliberalism exists to destroy the environment".

It does. The environment is there to be exploited and consumed.

[Kuciwalker]

Also what do you mean by "they restrict supply"? Wouldn't the correct thing to say be that they increase prices, thus reducing demand?

Demand is unaffected by prices; demand is a curve. Quantity demanded adjusts to match the price, which reduces quantity supplied. But unions actually achieve this by restricting the supply curve by prohibiting competition from non-union laborers. There are unemployed workers who would be willing to do the jobs for a lower price, but are not permitted to by the union's rules and thus cannot get a job.

[Fake Boris]

It does. The environment is there to be exploited and consumed.

That's interesting. Do you really think this, or is it your last stand at consistency?

[Kuciwalker]

That's interesting. Do you really think this, or is it your last stand at consistency?

This isn't a "conspiracy", in the sense of some sort of secret dealings. The union contracts explicitly forbid this!

[Fake Boris]

This isn't a "conspiracy", in the sense of some sort of secret dealings. The union contracts explicitly forbid this!

Free trade agreements have done a pretty good job of passing as "protectionism" all sorts of measures, including environmental ones. So it's a conspiracy?

[giblets]

It does. The environment is there to be exploited and consumed.

[Kuciwalker]

Sorry, I totally misread post #115 and thought you were quoting #110.

[Kuciwalker]

OM NOM NOM