GOP Primary Megathread!

[CountDeMoney]

Maybe Canadian unions are less corrupt.

Link, plz.

I'd like to see where all this "ZOMG UNIUNZ IS KORRUPT" stuff comes from.  Or at least how they're more corrupt than, say, the United Way, which is forced down the throat of employees by their masters.

[fhdz]

I'd like to see where all this "ZOMG UNIUNZ IS KORRUPT" stuff comes from.  Or at least how they're more corrupt than, say, the United Way, which is forced down the throat of employees by their masters.

You're not seriously thinking I'll jump to the defense of the United Way, are you?

I worked in a job for almost 9 years which was AFL-CIO. I saw union high-rankers do things clearly not in the interest of the union on a very, very regular basis.

EDIT: Actually now that I think about it, UW workplace campaigns are *an awful lot* like how unions tend to run operations in the US.

[CountDeMoney]

I'd like to see where all this "ZOMG UNIUNZ IS KORRUPT" stuff comes from.  Or at least how they're more corrupt than, say, the United Way, which is forced down the throat of employees by their masters.

You're not seriously thinking I'll jump to the defense of the United Way, are you?

I worked in a job for almost 9 years which was AFL-CIO. I saw union high-rankers do things clearly not in the interest of the union on a very, very regular basis.

Gimme evidence.  Quite frankly, I'd like to know more about all this UNIONS IS CORRUPT stuff coming from Languishtards. 

And no, you can't use Jimmy Hoffa as an example.  That's too schticky, sorta like how Neil defends Nixon, even though Nixon-worship hasn't been in style since Family Ties was cancelled.

[Jacob]

The United Steelworkers are pretty good in my experience, and they're active in both the US and Canada. They have some pretty explicit anti-corruption practices written into their governance.

[Jacob]

Unions serve two purposes: they extract rents and they adjudicate work place issues.  The first one is just plain wrong from a public good perspective.  The second one is fine in theory: supervisor fires a worker because he wants to bang the worker's squeeze, that's in nobody's interest except the supervisor.  Bringing it to the attention of managment is a good thing.  But that sort of thing describes a tiny fraction of the type of adjudication/advocay unions do in America.  Mostly they fight to keep dead wood on the payroll.

You're actually missing the primary two reason for unions in your analysis:

1) Collective bargaining; workers have more influence on their working conditions when they act collectively.

2) Pooling of resources. Again, workers tend to be better off when they pool their resources, whether it's funding for strike pay if necessary (thus improving their bargaining position) or providing pensions and health care.

[Admiral Yi]

You're actually missing the primary two reason for unions in your analysis:

1) Collective bargaining; workers have more influence on their working conditions when they act collectively.

2) Pooling of resources. Again, workers tend to be better off when they pool their resources, whether it's funding for strike pay if necessary (thus improving their bargaining position) or providing pensions and health care.

Extracting rents means gaining above market compensation.

[Jacob]

You're actually missing the primary two reason for unions in your analysis:

1) Collective bargaining; workers have more influence on their working conditions when they act collectively.

2) Pooling of resources. Again, workers tend to be better off when they pool their resources, whether it's funding for strike pay if necessary (thus improving their bargaining position) or providing pensions and health care.

Extracting rents means gaining above market compensation.

So HMOs are extracting rents? And employer provided benefit plans - be they insurance or pensions - are extracting rents as well because the employer negotiates the price of the product purchased on behalf of all its employees? If so, I don't think extracting rents is a bad thing.

As for collective bargaining, I reject your proposed axiom that market compensation is objectively calculated on an individual basis.

[Admiral Yi]

So HMOs are extracting rents? And employer provided benefit plans - be they insurance or pensions - are extracting rents as well because the employer negotiates the price of the product purchased on behalf of all its employees? If so, I don't think extracting rents is a bad thing.

No, sorry I didn't make it clear.  Cases of unions taking advantage of scale economies to lower costs of group benefits is not rent extraction.

As for collective bargaining, I reject your proposed axiom that market compensation is objectively calculated on an individual basis.

Market compensation is (apart from exceptions such as 100% commission or 100% peicerate compensation) not objectively calculated because of the information costs.  That doesn't refute the argument that unions seek above-market compensation, and are therefore extracting rents.

[sbr]

Doesn't everyone seek above-market compensation?

[Razgovory]

Doesn't everyone seek above-market compensation?

Yes, but it's okay when it's for you.  When it's someone else it's bad.

[Admiral Yi]

Doesn't everyone seek above-market compensation?

Sure.  Almost everyone wants more, that's the capitalist way.

[sbr]

Doesn't everyone seek above-market compensation?

Sure.  Almost everyone wants more, that's the capitalist way.

So everyone who negotiates their own salary is extracting rents.

[Admiral Yi]

So everyone who negotiates their own salary is extracting rents.

No.

[sbr]

So everyone who negotiates their own salary is extracting rents.

No.

So everyone who negotiates their own salary, and seeks better than marker compensation, is extracting rents.

[Ideologue]

Everyone who engages in "price-fixing" with "competitors" is exacting a rent, by "manipulating the marketplace" to their advantage.

Unfortunately, that assumes that employees are atomized "firms" that "individually negotiate their compensation," the opposition to which is the entire point of a fucking union in the first place, and which is largely a fiction anyway, especially the "negotiate" part.

Union bargaining is nothing more than seeking an exclusive contract with a client to supply something of value--in this case, labor.