Private sector unions? Absolutely.I thought he was operating under the assumption the most skilled worker is the worker that best negotiates. I guess he's very fond of unions then.
Income Inequality: Why the Economy Is Not Right for All Americans
- Thread starter saturn7
- Start date
Secure Da Bag
Veteran
Private sector unions? Absolutely.
If the gov't participates in the free market -- they provide goods or services -- then why wouldn't public sector unions be acceptable? Why don't those workers deserve to be able to negotiate better wages, benefits, and work conditions?
the cac mamba
Veteran
stop asking for specifics :jayfdup: that's not how this works
Secure Da Bag
Veteran
Public sector unions don’t compete the market though...
What is the name of the competing education system, law enforcement agency, fire fighters, etc?
If all public teachers strike education effectively stops, there’s no other school district you can take your children to as far as I know, please explain this “free market” you believe they are part of? how many players are in it besides the state?
Secure Da Bag
Veteran
Public sector unions don’t compete the market though...
What is the name of the competing education system, law enforcement agency, fire fighters, etc?
I said participate. Not compete. But isn't there charter schools, private schools, parochial schools, religious schools. Clearly there is some competition in schooling.
Bounty hunters, security guards, private security, private detectives, lawyers are a thing. They're not public entities.
Wasn't there a newsstory some time ago about a private fire fighter station? I know there was one where a fire fighter station wasn't truly public because some residents didn't pay a fee of some sort.
I already answered that.
But you still didn't answer my other question,
I see the problem as there is control to be bought...
There has never been a civilization in history where power and influence couldn't be bought.
That being said, It's not about figuring out some weird ratio of winners and losers. That's the wrong way of looking at it.
The key to making a more equitable economy (and society) is to focus on improving equality of opportunity.
Not equality of outcome, which you seem to think all left-leaning individuals want.
There reason why 1% of Americans own more than 50% of this nation's wealth is because they remove caps to their wealth-earning potential and limit economic opportunity for lower wage workers whenever possible. We do not have equality of opportunity in this country.
To base earning potential solely on "skill" or "effort" is to ignore the plain truth: many people don't earn more because they don't have the opportunity to earn more.
They don't compete, so they aren't in the same position as private sector unions. You really don't see the disproportionate power public sector unions hold?
Public sector unions are negotiating with employers who they voted for and provided campaign contributions too... which(in my opinion) creates a conflict of interest. The employer is also negotiating with tax payer money not their own as in the private sector...
Not even in the same ballpark far as im concerned.As for your question, they do...
individually.
This nikka said bounty hunters.
Domingo Halliburton
Handmade in USA
Billionaires shouldn't exist.
Secure Da Bag
Veteran
Probably the thinking is: if billionaires exist then there is a major imbalance in the economy which is causing everyone who are not millionaires to be poorer than they should be.
But he asked for specifics.That's how he wants it to work.
No he doesn't.
He wanted to play the Socratic gotcha game. I GAVE the specifics, got 11 daps, and he ignored it. Now the three of you are doubling down on the same game even AFTER I gave the specifics.
Cac Mamba with his dishonest arguing again.
No he doesn't.
He wanted to play the Socratic gotcha game. I GAVE the specifics, got 11 daps, and he ignored it. Now the three of you are doubling down on the same game even AFTER I gave the specifics.
Cac Mamba with his dishonest arguing again.
Didn't ignore it, I dapped it and replied "i see the problem as there is power to be bought" which I see as the underlying issue in each of your bullet points... and realized this part here summed it up.We simply have to agree to disagree.
I don't believe their gain is another's loss. There's no fixed pie.
The conversation then swirved to unions.
Domingo Halliburton
Handmade in USA
Kind of what the other guy said already. But if theres homeless people and people going hungry the fact that you are hoarding all that money is ridiculous.
Also hoarding that type of money creates huge inefficiencies in the economy and slows the velocity of money down.
You ignored my response to this, though.
There has never been a civilization in history where power and influence couldn't be bought.
That being said, It's not about figuring out some weird ratio of winners and losers. That's the wrong way of looking at it.
The key to making a more equitable economy (and society) is to focus on improving equality of opportunity.
Not equality of outcome, which you seem to think all left-leaning individuals want.
There reason why 1% of Americans own more than 50% of this nation's wealth is because they remove caps to their wealth-earning potential and limit economic opportunity for lower wage workers whenever possible. We do not have equality of opportunity in this country.
To base earning potential solely on "skill" or "effort" is to ignore the plain truth: many people don't earn more because they don't have the opportunity to earn more.