English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Or do you have a better idea to reduce income inequality in this country, and ensure people have a living wage.

2007-03-04 16:24:53 · 17 answers · asked by Longhaired Freaky Person 4 in Politics & Government Politics

yes, robot_hooker, all they have to do is work...in India.

2007-03-04 16:30:15 · update #1

Josh, neither can an American worker competing against somebody making 80 cents a day.

2007-03-04 16:45:47 · update #2

17 answers

Unions have outlived their usefulness to the worker. They are now a hindrance to productivity. More unions will drive more jobs over seas

2007-03-04 16:31:52 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2 2

I worked for a company that had union for 15 years. The union , as far as I'm concerned, priced us right out of a job. We were making more then a fair wage and the union kept after, more and more, till the company said,"enough." The union pushed all the workers to strike. What do you think happened? The ill-legals came in by the truckloads and we know longer had a job. Union is fine but their also has to be common sense used. A company has to make a profit or its over. Sure didn't help matters that...... and is at this time, more then enough ill-legals to take the job.
When I put my self in the place of the employer, here was one of my thoughts when I worked and had union. There was a lot of real dead beat employee's hiding from work all day and yet making a good wage. The company was stuck with the deadbeats because of union. Anyplace else they would have been fired. That's not fair to the employer or to the people that are working their hind ends off and seeing this deadbeat do nothing and get the same wage. It drags the company down. If you expect a good wage, then earn it.

2007-03-05 00:40:40 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 3 1

I think minimum wage should be raised to $15 per hour over the course of...7 (?) years. I'm open to the time frame, but it can't shock the system so drastically as to cause a recession. Unfortunately, this would cause a loss of jobs, I'm sure, at the low end manufacturing. We need to do it while the economy is healthy though, with low inflation. Like, say, now.

But we can alter the schedule if the economy goes south.

It should be easy to unionise. But admittance should, of course, be entirely an individuals choice. And one should be able to join, or leave, without fear of reprisal, from fellow members, as well as employers.

2007-03-05 00:37:35 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

Have you ever worked with a union? It was one of the worst experiances of my life. You couldn't discipline anyone for not working and you couldn't reward anyone for working hard. The end result was half of the worker quit working about 2 pm and there was nothing management could do about it.

I have never been more convinced of exactly why communism failed in Russia.


In referance to your comment to the robot guy: Unions and other regulations are exactly what drives many companies to set up shop in places like India. A socialistic organization like a union can't survive globalization.

2007-03-05 00:28:30 · answer #4 · answered by Josh 4 · 4 1

The number of union workers in the US has been in a steady decline for years as the country moves from a manufacturing industrial base to a knowledge industrial base.

If people want a living wage, all they have to do is work.

2007-03-05 00:28:57 · answer #5 · answered by robot_hooker 4 · 2 2

More important than the unions is the jobs. It's a shame that thousands of jobs are getting outsourced to third world countries. What pisses me off is we made them big companies by supporting them and buying their products for so many years. Then they decide to get more greedy, you know the CEO needs a 6 million dollar bonus. So the logical answer for them is "Let's pack up and move to China".

2007-03-05 00:31:56 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 4 0

Yes, but at the same time, we need to enforce laws preventing unions from committing the atrocities originally committed by big business.

2007-03-05 00:51:34 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

Only if you want to make more US companies move their jobs over seas.

If you want to reduce income inequalities get the libs out of education. Stop indoctrinating kids with liberal garbage (like this question) and start educating.

You want to hear something like, let's organize McDonald's, Burger King and Subway so these people can make $30/hour, have a 401K with full medical and dental, 4 weeks vacation plus sick leave. However, that still won't be enough for libs like you. There is still someone out there making more, allot more. So we need to plunder these people, let's tax them, say 75%. That's OK cuz their rich.

You thieving libs are sick.

2007-03-05 00:44:25 · answer #8 · answered by patriot p 2 · 1 3

Yes we do have to make it easier to organize workers. Businesses like Wal-Mart have adopted very anti-union policies over the years and the playing field is not level anymore. And we all know how Wal-Mart treats it's employees. Sam would not approve.

2007-03-05 00:37:50 · answer #9 · answered by itsdabigbadwolf 3 · 4 1

I think, we need to allow the unions and companies be able to come to better agreements and better flexibility for unforeseen circumstances. I mean, they each have no flexablity

2007-03-05 00:32:06 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

fedest.com, questions and answers