The General US Politics Thread

Except that does not exist except in companies that don't have union at all. Which are, coincidentally, shitty places to work at.

If you work at a place that has a union, then you enjoy union benefits, it's as simple as that. And if you don't want to pay for it, then you're just mooching off. If you don't like it, just go to the non-unionized neighbor that pays you half.

edited 7th Jul '17 12:54:18 AM by Medinoc

Agreed, but (as I read; Serenity, please tell me if I've got you wrong) he wants the right to choose such a job in such a workplace, with the detriments that that implies.

Given the American union system (we're not Europe, we don't generally require companies to unionize) I think that that's a reasonable request.

EDIT (sheesh, we're editing past each other): Yeah, going to a nonunionized workplace would be my advice too. Without Medinoc's unnecessarily condescending attitude.

And I do repeat, Medinoc. Please stop with the condescension.

edited 7th Jul '17 12:55:49 AM by Ramidel

I mean, unions exist for the sole purpose of giving the workers more rights, better working conditions, fairer treatment as people in the workplace, and better wages. I can't imagine why anyone would want a job in a place without a union, because such places tend to be much shittier places to work overall.

You don't need to be able to imagine it, you need to be able to accept it.

I accept it, I just think it's a poor decision.

I think that what one thinks of unions, mandatory or otherwise, partly depends on one's own work experiences.

Someone who has a great job and a great work environment sans a union would probably balk at the very idea of a job where giving money to a union is mandatory.

Someone who got screwed by a union that acted more like a protection racket would probably be soured on the very idea of unions.

Someone who is stuck working at a shitty job at a place without a union and no realistic options to work elsewhere would probably give a kidney to work at a place where there is a union that requires employees to donate money.

edited 7th Jul '17 1:20:03 AM by M84

My apologizes Ramidel, I didn't mean to misinterpret or misrepresent. You also nailed it: I just want to be able to decide the course my life takes without interference from any person, group or entity, whether that be the government, unions, friends or family. And I fully accept any and all consequences that may or may not befall me.

edited 7th Jul '17 2:00:06 AM by Serenity92

Almost sounds like you want to live off the grid entirely.

And I can definitely sympathize with that, and wherever possible, agree. However, when you live in contact with other people, what rights you have are dependent on having a functional society. So not only is a government needed to defend against force or fraud and arbitrate disputes, but (as John Locke noted in his development of the social contract) you also need a degree of social insurance, because nobody has any incentive to respect your rights if they're starving. I also think that you probably want to prevent too much concentration of power in any hands, because of the risk of subverting the political system or defeating the government's monopoly on force; this is best done by taking affirmative steps to empower all citizens, even if that means taxes.

So while more freedom should be seen as a good thing, you have to look at positive as well as negative freedom, at least to an extent. As David Brin said, "I Am A Member Of A Civilization."

edited 7th Jul '17 2:20:57 AM by Ramidel

If I could get away with that without turning into some crazed hermit, it probably wouldn't be too bad an idea. But I'd also miss my D&D group so...

I totally see that point, which is why I like to engage in debate rather than shouting matches, or outright revolt or buying an island and forming my own super-libertarian government there. I do love America and believe in its greatness, though I'm not too keen on how the government deals with things.

edited 7th Jul '17 2:30:26 AM by Serenity92

Tidbit from G20: 19 Heads arrive via car. One special snowflake takes helicopter.

Guess which.

edited 7th Jul '17 2:42:27 AM by 3of4

It's gonna be a shitshow.

Absolutely, I for one am glad to have you here, and I very much hope that the rest of us can cool off our reflexive, knee-jerk rejection of anything smelling of conservative or libertarian and engage with you in good faith.

So. You support right-to-work laws and don't like union shops. Can I ask what measures you would prefer to use to ensure that workers' rights are protected and a living wage guaranteed, if unions can't rely on compulsory contributions from workers?

For example, a couple of nonunion tools I could see are a high statutory minimum wage and an aggressive and well-funded Labor department that could take legal action. Alternately, a union could make a direct contract with the employer to be funded by the company, based either on headcount or a percentage of payroll.

edited 7th Jul '17 2:46:30 AM by Ramidel

One point against right-to-work laws are their rather unsavory origins. Try looking up Vance Muse some time, and shudder in loathing.

edited 7th Jul '17 3:00:07 AM by M84

Thank you! That's an interesting question as a high compulsory minimum wage can shut down smaller businesses, and many companies (obviously not places like Mc Donald's and other such businesses) already pay above minimum wage. It'd take some thought.

I think many people are willing to join unions when the unions are not getting power hungry nor mandatory. Ideally, unions would still be around, working for employee rights, without having to force other employees to cough up part of their paycheck for it involuntarily. But that may be a bit too idealistic considering the state of the world. There are other avenues that also act very similarly to unions without actually being a union like the Association of Texas Professional Educators who lobby with the state government for better wages and working conditions. And while Texas doesn't pay the most, they do pay fairly for first year teachers. I'll have to think about that more so I don't spout out something stupid.

RE: Trump arriving at G20 Hamburg 2017 by helicopter: More riots then?

but if a minimum or living wage shuts down business, isn't that just straight capitalism as they were nor profitable enough to survive in the markets?

Then they'd just claim that the big bad government imposing an unfair minimum wage means it isn't a real free market and thus not real capitalism.

Of course, that's laissez faire horseshit.

edited 7th Jul '17 5:08:04 AM by M84

If you can't afford to pay your employees a living wage, you shouldn't be in business.

EDIT: Ayo, pagetopper.

edited 7th Jul '17 5:31:04 AM by CrimsonZephyr

I'm not against paying employees a living wage. I'm against a minimum wage that's too high for it's own good. A minimum wage that's too high has negative repercussions.

Here's the thing, when you interact with other people you impact their life, you interfere with their plans and desires.

When you drive on roads my taxes pay for, breath air that's clean because of laws enforced by people whose salaries by taxes pay for, use an Internet that way laid down by a government my taxes pay for, you're having an impact because you're using things that need to be maintained and that maintained costs money.

I pay my taxes happily because I get some pretty good value out of them, clean water is awesome, breathable air is awesome, fire departments are wesome, the Internet is awesome, my house not spontainiosuly combusting is awesome, food I know won't kill me randomly is awesome.

You mentioned before that for you a big moment was the police not coming quickly when you called. I get how that could have a big impact, but rather than your solution of "we shouldn't pay for these things" might I suggest that we get more things? American police responce times are horrific in a number of places, to solve that you need more patrols, more police on the beat, more preventative measures, not less.

edited 7th Jul '17 5:44:02 AM by Silasw

Here's the thing though: I do not adversely affect anyone with basic interaction. I don't interfere with anyone's right to live or speak or worship in whatever way they choose. I'm also not into restricting my rights or the rights of others so that I can feel safer. I'd rather have my freedom thank you. The one thing I will never forgive the previous administration for is letting the NSA spy on American citizens and the one thing I will never forgive the Bush administration for is passing the patriot act that let the Obama administration allow the NSA to spy on us. I'm not cool with giving up my constitutional rights in the name of security.

Idly, I wonder if it would be possible to create some new institution that had the benefit of unions without their drawbacks and also in some sense be universal (which means it would probably have to be government backed)

I recognize the union as a needful thing but as an institution I doubt it's the end all, be all and some unions do wield power in dubious or boneheaded ways.

edited 7th Jul '17 6:06:03 AM by Elle

But the problem is that you have those who say that a minimum wage is at a level that's bad for business before that wage reaches the point of being affordable to live on where the job is. Which do you go with?

I don't necessarily think it would need to be government backed. It could probably function along the lines of some sort of lobby group, or nonprofit that puts pressure on companies to not be douchebags

I go the route that lets me pay employees what I think they're worth. Now, since I'm not a douche, I realize that $7.25/hr is not easy to live on in most areas (and downright impossible in others) but the people I pay the minimum wage would only be part-time high school/college students. If I'm going to employ an adult, then I start them higher. If they prove themselves better than what I pay them, I give them a raise. I also am not in the habit of paying myself too much, especially if I'm running a small business. It's a delicate balance but it is doable.

edited 7th Jul '17 6:20:28 AM by Serenity92