I guess you don't have too much faith in your abilities or you are just a
poor
performer.

Wouldn't know. For 90% of my career to date I have been either self employed or
in management. I haven't worked for wages since 1973. My income has always been
from partnership and corporate income, royalties, sales commissions, rents,
etc. How well do I do? Let's just say I routinely make subtantially more than
those folks who "move boxes around."

Very few people can do what I have done, and can do, to earn a living. I
personally don't need a union, but others might. WE should all be aware of what
needs may be present in society beyond our own personal sphere.

Look at your next two paragraphs and consider how they unintentionally
contradict one another:

I have never had a problem negotiating pay increases based on my
contributions. Most
hard workers who contribute to the bottom line do not have problems either.
They
negotiate one on one based on their skills and contributions.

Unions lead to mediocrity. Why work hard or perform over and beyond? You
will get the
same pay increase no matter what.

In one paragraph you detail how you take pride in doing a good job and making a
contribution. In the next, you surmise that
union workers are incapable of being motivated by the same factors.

And the collective bargaining leads to lower productivity and mediocrity. If
you need
it, fine. Most people with skills and talent don't need a group to bargain
for them.

Slave wages lead to low productivity, too.


You forgot the part about padding their pockets. That is where most of the
money goes.

Got a specific example, or just a quick sound byte?

Just a few of my questions. Take you time in answering them.

No time needed. Next time, try to think up some tough ones. :-)

Perhaps if you took your time you could have provided some better answers.


And if Jesus, Buddha, and Vishnu all knocked on your front door and told you
that unions have some useful purposes these days, you'd still remain
unconvinced and take up atheism. :-)

gould,

there may be problems (much of them overhyped) with some unions in the modern
economy.

but, what our idealogical friends here fail to understand is that non-union
blue collar labor needs the unions. for example, i live in houston and have
friends that work as operators in the refineries. some are union, some are
non-union......it depends on the refinery.

"amazingly", total compensation is roughly the same between the two. i dont
think this total compensation for non-union would stay constant or increase at
the same rate/year if the union ceased to exist. of course, there is no way to
really prove this, but it is a hunch i am inflicted with.

im sure there are some in here that would beg to differ........and it is all
theoretical. they would say the equal compensation is proof that unions are not
required anymore. i disagree; i dont trust corporate management, and i think
generally history is on my side. non-union wages would fall like a rock without
the union setting the bar......

chris

Subject: What Makes a Political Liberal
From: (Gould 0738)
Date: 8/7/03 7:50 PM Pacific Daylight Time
Message-id:

I guess you don't have too much faith in your abilities or you are just a
poor
performer.

Wouldn't know. For 90% of my career to date I have been either self employed
or
in management. I haven't worked for wages since 1973. My income has always
been
from partnership and corporate income, royalties, sales commissions, rents,
etc. How well do I do? Let's just say I routinely make subtantially more than
those folks who "move boxes around."

Very few people can do what I have done, and can do, to earn a living. I
personally don't need a union, but others might. WE should all be aware of
what
needs may be present in society beyond our own personal sphere.

Look at your next two paragraphs and consider how they unintentionally
contradict one another:

I have never had a problem negotiating pay increases based on my
contributions. Most
hard workers who contribute to the bottom line do not have problems either.
They
negotiate one on one based on their skills and contributions.

Unions lead to mediocrity. Why work hard or perform over and beyond? You
will get the
same pay increase no matter what.

In one paragraph you detail how you take pride in doing a good job and making
a
contribution. In the next, you surmise that
union workers are incapable of being motivated by the same factors.

And the collective bargaining leads to lower productivity and mediocrity.
If
you need
it, fine. Most people with skills and talent don't need a group to bargain
for them.

Slave wages lead to low productivity, too.


You forgot the part about padding their pockets. That is where most of the
money goes.

Got a specific example, or just a quick sound byte?

Just a few of my questions. Take you time in answering them.

No time needed. Next time, try to think up some tough ones. :-)

Perhaps if you took your time you could have provided some better answers.


And if Jesus, Buddha, and Vishnu all knocked on your front door and told you
that unions have some useful purposes these days, you'd still remain
unconvinced and take up atheism. :-)