From TowardLiberty, who doesn't like us enough to come post. Anyway, he is a brilliant young economic mind, and I sto... I mean, borrowed his post...
---
I have italicized the parts that are relevant to what has been argued back and forth on the pages of ---. I am posting this article as a further example of the point of view that unions are leeches on society and that includes the common worker.
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimages.mises.org%2FTugOfWar.jpg&hash=e9fb247a8972c31428fbe00d912d031ba9717686)
More for Me Does Not Mean Better for Us by Gary Galles
In the Wisconsin labor dispute, now increasingly spreading nationwide, I have lost count of the times union defenders have justified their position based on little more than the assertion that some union benefited them or some member of their family — followed by the conclusion that all Americans must therefore gain. Unfortunately, that "logic" is invalid. A policy that gives me more does not mean the result is better for us. And the primary effect of unions and union-backed policies is to harm the vast majority of Americans.
Unions succeed by leveraging special government-granted powers to eliminate competition from other workers who are willing to do the same work for less. (This is a form of collusion that would be legally prosecuted if done by anyone else.) Those displaced workers either become unemployed or must go elsewhere to find jobs, increasing the supply of labor services in nonunion employment, pushing down wages for all workers in those jobs. The resulting wage premium does not come from employers, as union rhetoric implies, but primarily from other workers' pockets. Because only about 7 percent of our private-sector workforce remains unionized, more than nine in ten private-sector workers are injured by such union power.
Aware that their special grant of government power stops at the border, unions have been the primary movers behind government protectionism of all stripes undermining the well-being of workers who would have gained from expanded exports as well as those who, as consumers, would gain from lower cost and/or higher quality imports.
Unions' sellout of workers' interests has included conducting campaigns to harass and regulate nonunion apprenticeship programs out of existence, thus keeping other workers from acquiring skills to earn more and compete with the unions in the future. They have also used environmental challenges to stop construction projects until labor agreements guaranteeing that the jobs go to union workers could be extorted.
snip
Perhaps most important, unlike private employers, who must find willing customers to pay the cost of richer labor deals, government unions can use the coercive power of government to force even unwilling "customers" to pay the costs through their taxes (and increasingly, through the crowding out of spending on other government programs, as labor deals' adverse impacts on budgets grow over time).
Unions claim to advance the interests of all working men and women. But they actually injure the vast majority of Americans, both as workers and consumers, to advance their own interests. Government-union members, despite self-congratulatory claims like "we do it for the kids" (although their forcing overpayment for providing those services and sacrificing those they "serve" whenever it conflicts with their compensation demands makes "we do it to the kids" more accurate), gain even more for their members by imposing even greater harm on others. And groups who use their power for their own benefit at others' expense (which would also include those involved in robbery, fraud and organized crime), undermine Americans' shared interests rather than contributing to them.
http://mises.org/daily/5092/More-for-Me-Does-Not-Mean-Better-for-Us (http://mises.org/daily/5092/More-for-Me-Does-Not-Mean-Better-for-Us)
Was looking for Zip to lose it on that one. :))
Quote from: walkstall on March 08, 2011, 07:35:13 PM
Was looking for Zip to lose it on that one. :))
He's off the clock...
Hello fellas, I've been persuaded to ye ranks. A big 10 4 going out to those who are lovers of liberty and individual rights- in me you will see a staunch defender of these values.
He made it!!!!
I know you're busy with your classes and projects and books and words n stuff, but def drop in and post when you can!!!
Quote from: TowardLiberty on March 08, 2011, 08:07:49 PM
Hello fellas, I've been persuaded to ye ranks. A big 10 4 going out to those who are lovers of liberty and individual rights- in me you will see a staunch defender of these values.
Nice seeing you young man. I hope taxed did not twist your arm that much. ;D
Don't forget the Ladies. ;D
Quote from: taxed on March 08, 2011, 08:09:28 PM
He made it!!!!
I know you're busy with your classes and projects and books and words n stuff, but def drop in and post when you can!!!
You bet, bud.
Hah. "Books and words and stuff"... That cracked me up.
Quote from: walkstall on March 08, 2011, 08:13:04 PM
Nice seeing you young man. I hope taxed did not twist your arm that much. ;D
I had to trick him... I told him we had a bunch of marxists and commies over here who love unions, hate freedom, and love heavy market interference...
Quote from: taxed on March 08, 2011, 08:15:25 PM
I had to trick him... I told him we had a bunch of marxists and commies over here who love unions, hate freedom, and love heavy market interference...
Yes I think we have 1 or 2 RINO. ;)
Quote from: walkstall on March 08, 2011, 08:13:04 PM
Nice seeing you young man. I hope taxed did not twist your arm that much. ;D
Thanks walkstall. Feeling is mutual.
Didn't need too much persuasion- been thinking of coming over for a while now. School has been keeping my time thin so that's the reason for the hesitation.
Quote from: TowardLiberty on March 08, 2011, 08:07:49 PM
Hello fellas, I've been persuaded to ye ranks. A big 10 4 going out to those who are lovers of liberty and individual rights- in me you will see a staunch defender of these values.
Glad you could make it over TL.
Welcome to the forum. 8)
Quote from: TowardLiberty on March 08, 2011, 08:19:17 PM
Thanks walkstall. Feeling is mutual.
Didn't need too much persuasion- been thinking of coming over for a while now. School has been keeping my time thin so that's the reason for the hesitation.
Please give us a run down on school so we know what your taking.
Quote from: Solar on March 08, 2011, 08:19:44 PM
Glad you could make it over TL.
Welcome to the forum. 8)
Thanks Solar. Good to be around some sanity for a change. :D
Quote from: TowardLiberty on March 08, 2011, 08:26:17 PM
Thanks Solar. Good to be around some sanity for a change. :D
I know you said that "tongue n cheek". ;) ;D
Quote from: walkstall on March 08, 2011, 08:21:26 PM
Please give us a run down on school so we know what your taking.
Last semester was more interesting.
I was taking a senior level international trade class- really enjoyed that one. I also was in a money and banking class- one that was heavily influenced by Austrian business cycle theory. So needless to say that was a plus. The professor, Dr Hardee, took it upon herself to introduce us to these ideas- the econ department is pretty much ignorant of Austrian econ at UofHouston. And the last class I had was intermediate microeconomics. This class dealt with consumer theory, indifference curves, monopoly theory, externlities and a little about the role of decentralized knowledge. This was taught by a very smart pro free market economist, Dr Ruffin- Ruffin would routinely declare that Keynesian economics is dead- mind you this is a class on microeconmics- so Keynes and his macro policies were not even a relevant topic- but Ruffin didn't care. He took it upon himself to make sure his students understood the fallacies of Keynesian economics. Suffice to say, I appreciated that.
Ok- that is probably a little more information than was necessary- but you asked!
Quote from: Solar on March 08, 2011, 08:32:33 PM
I know you said that "tongue n cheek". ;) ;D
Not me. Not eva. No way. ;D
Enjoyed your piece above, TL! Welcome!
Quote from: TowardLiberty on March 08, 2011, 08:33:51 PM
Last semester was more interesting.
I was taking a senior level international trade class- really enjoyed that one. I also was in a money and banking class- one that was heavily influenced by Austrian business cycle theory. So needless to say that was a plus. The professor, Dr Hardee, took it upon herself to introduce us to these ideas- the econ department is pretty much ignorant of Austrian econ at UofHouston. And the last class I had was intermediate microeconomics. This class dealt with consumer theory, indifference curves, monopoly theory, externlities and a little about the role of decentralized knowledge. This was taught by a very smart pro free market economist, Dr Ruffin- Ruffin would routinely declare that Keynesian economics is dead- mind you this is a class on microeconmics- so Keynes and his macro policies were not even a relevant topic- but Ruffin didn't care. He took it upon himself to make sure his students understood the fallacies of Keynesian economics. Suffice to say, I appreciated that.
Ok- that is probably a little more information than was necessary- but you asked!
That is awesome... Just by osmosis, so many people let Keynesian economics seep into their brain, and the sooner it is brought to light so it can be identified, much like a poisonous plant or snake, the better.
Quote from: TowardLiberty on March 08, 2011, 08:33:51 PM
Last semester was more interesting. semester
I was taking a senior level international trade class- really enjoyed that one. I also was in a money and banking class- one that was heavily influenced by Austrian business cycle theory. So needless to say that was a plus. The professor, Dr Hardee, took it upon herself to introduce us to these ideas- the econ department is pretty much ignorant of Austrian econ at UofHouston. And the last class I had was intermediate microeconomics. This class dealt with consumer theory, indifference curves, monopoly theory, externlities and a little about the role of decentralized knowledge. This was taught by a very smart pro free market economist, Dr Ruffin- Ruffin would routinely declare that Keynesian economics is dead- mind you this is a class on microeconmics- so Keynes and his macro policies were not even a relevant topic- but Ruffin didn't care. He took it upon himself to make sure his students understood the fallacies of Keynesian economics. Suffice to say, I appreciated that.
Ok- that is probably a little more information than was necessary- but you asked!
Thanks sound like you enjoyed all of last semester.
Quote from: taxed on March 08, 2011, 08:38:51 PM
That is awesome... Just by osmosis, so many people let Keynesian economics seep into their brain, and the sooner it is brought to light so it can be identified, much like a poisonous plant or snake, the better.
Yeap, and that is how Dr. Ruffin saw it- almost like doing a public service.
Quote from: walkstall on March 08, 2011, 08:40:23 PM
Thanks sound like you enjoyed all of last semester.
I thoroughly did. One semester to go and I will be done. Man I cannot wait!
Quote from: TowardLiberty on March 08, 2011, 08:48:59 PM
Yeap, and that is how Dr. Ruffin saw it- almost like doing a public service.
It is one of those topics, when you get into a conversation, that no one seems to be able to defend. Simple common sense just pulls the rug out of the whole thing.
Hey TL, I've been struck all along during the Wisconsin/Ohio/NJ/Indiana/California state budget debates by the fundamental differences between 'classic' labor unions and public-sector unions. We've had some discussion about what I see as the fundamentally different roles of the two types of union. I see them as so fundamentally different, in fact, that I hesitate to classify public-sector unions as 'labor unions' at all. To my mind, what we call public-sector 'unions' are actually political organizations, with only the thinnest veneer of 'labor union' slapped on for political cover.
With a few exceptions (George Will comes to mind, but there are others), this point has been largely overlooked by the pundits. What say you?
Quote from: tbone0106 on March 08, 2011, 09:23:27 PM
Hey TL, I've been struck all along during the Wisconsin/Ohio/NJ/Indiana/California state budget debates by the fundamental differences between 'classic' labor unions and public-sector unions. We've had some discussion about what I see as the fundamentally different roles of the two types of union. I see them as so fundamentally different, in fact, that I hesitate to classify public-sector unions as 'labor unions' at all. To my mind, what we call public-sector 'unions' are actually political organizations, with only the thinnest veneer of 'labor union' slapped on for political cover.
With a few exceptions (George Will comes to mind, but there are others), this point has been largely overlooked by the pundits. What say you?
I would agree.
It comes down to the different nature of private vs public employment. The private sector unions are more limited in their scope of influence because ultimately the company still has to be profitable.
But public sector unions do not work for a company that lives and dies by attracting consumer dollars- they tax their revenue from the "consumer" and competition is a non-issue because of the government monopoly. We cant simply switch to a competitors services, which gives the public unions much more power than their private sector counterparts.
To me, this is the great distinction.
A responsible academic should confront bad scholarship wherever found. It's a general responsibility of scholars.
Plus it's quite often fun. Please convey my thanks to Dr. Ruffin for doing his duty to try to tear down one of the great academic frauds of the twentieth century.
Quote from: arpad on March 09, 2011, 09:32:21 AM
A responsible academic should confront bad scholarship wherever found. It's a general responsibility of scholars.
Plus it's quite often fun. Please convey my thanks to Dr. Ruffin for doing his duty to try to tear down one of the great academic frauds of the twentieth century.
Will do. He definitely enjoyed it. You could see the smirk on his face as he scribbled out C + I + G.... on the chalk board. We all came away with a new understanding of macro- no doubt about that.