Quote:
Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
"Flexible and dynamic"? You're taking the concept of "wiggle word" to new heights. The only flexible and dynami thing business is doing is figuring out ways to lower costs. Production/revenue hasn't been moving up, so businesses for the last several years have had to "grow" profits by cutting costs. Thats the big lie in the Bush economy. The numbers don't reflect growth - they reflect wringing the same amount of product out of less bodies and machinery.
What unions are doing is trying to keep a certain standard wage for their workers. They are necessary. And you're seeing why right now. If allowed, employers will - in fact, they have an obligation to - reduce costs as much as possible. Workers are a cost. The reason so many white collar workers are getting shitty pay and shitty benefits is because they have no bargaining power. They're becoming what the blue collar workers were before unions. Business has no "check" at the moment.
I agree that theoretically, business should be allowed to wipe out as many workers as it likes. The problem is, I'm not sure that society benefits from that arrangement.
Ayn Rand, much as I like her views, was, from a practical perspective, an idiot.
|
Ayn Rand? Your study of economics may come from Ayn Rand and Norma Rae but not mine. I see the practical effect of what the unions are up to every time I get a call from Sacramento saying "you are not going to guess what the unions are up to now." See my earlier comment on where they stand on regulation, competition, and free trade acts.
