Unions: Where did the U.S.A. go wrong?

[Goofball]

I can't format my reply because of the forums downgrade that happened recently, so this will be a little disorganized.

1. Screwed up is a very vague term. What does it mean to you?
2. Because their emplyers won't stop exploiting them right to the edge of what society will bear.
3. Absolutely.
4. Short answer: the rich would flouirish to unimaginable levels and the poor would be stripped of what little protections they have at work.
5. No. Without unions those laws will be eroded.

Oh, and stop with the "unions are both good and bad" bunk. Life is not like South Park and the truth is not always in the middle. Thinking that it is shows you have no clue what you're talking about.

1. Because North American Unions operate more on the "protection racket" model than on the collective approach to a better deal.
2. It's just like your politics. No how matter how reasonable a policy may be, if it was proposed by the "other side" the opposition is required to say how crappy it is.
3. No and no.
4. Higher productivity; younger workers treated fairly out from under the thumb of seniority; merit-based reward; profit-sharing, etc...
5. They already have been. That's why unions have had to become so much more aggressive and unreasonable, making demands (in some cases) that any sane person can see will bankrupt the hand that feeds them and put them out of jobs.

You're absolutely right, jabarto. There is absolutely no "good" in unions.

[jabarto]

way to ignore 200 years of economic history there sport

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Somewhere betwixt the two of you is likely to be an accurate answer. Neither of your arguments is without merit.

[jabarto]

I don't even know what to say anymore. On one hand you have the people who will not desist from their holy crusade to veiw the truth as always being in the middle despite any and all evidence to the contrary. On the other, you have the people who, when confronted with fact that exploitation is still a real and serious problem, proclaim, "OH PSHAW THAT COULD NEVER HAPPEN IN A MILLION MILLION YEARS" despite the fact that it can, has, does, and will happen unless measures are taken to prevent it. This thread is like a melting pot for bad arguments.

[Lemur]

This thread is like a melting pot for bad arguments.

And mixed metaphors. But I have personally contributed to other melting pots of bad arguments, so I wouldn't want you to go away with the impression that it's exclusive to this thread. We can do bad arguments anywhere.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

I don't even know what to say anymore. On one hand you have the people who will not desist from their holy crusade to veiw the truth as always being in the middle despite any and all evidence to the contrary. On the other, you have the people who, when confronted with fact that exploitation is still a real and serious problem, proclaim, "OH PSHAW THAT COULD NEVER HAPPEN IN A MILLION MILLION YEARS" despite the fact that it can, has, does, and will happen unless measures are taken to prevent it. This thread is like a melting pot for bad arguments.

Crusading for the middle? Pal, have you got the wrong idea about me.