Liberal Forum

FJB » 01 Sep 2022, 1:57 pm » wrote: ↑

01 Sep 2022, 1:57 pm

There are laws on the books now... Biden is NOT enforcing those laws.

Clearly that is the case.  I agree it is illegal and a major problem.  But that's what we get for allowing a brain dead idiot to compromise the election process and take the reigns of power.

LibDave » 01 Sep 2022, 12:18 pm » wrote: ↑

01 Sep 2022, 12:18 pm

Unions ARE communism. 

Tell that to Leck Walesa....  
Strong Unions OPEN UP THE MIDDLE CLASS AND THEY HAVE A POSITIVE EFFECT ON THE PREVAILING WAGES OF THE LOCAL ECONOMY
Increased competition with untrained, unsafe,  Non Union Scabs and Illegal Aliens hands massive amounts of man hours over to people who are content to sleep in the parking lots where they work..or to go 3 or 4 families to  rental housing.
Well training Union Workers should not be forced to live like Gypsies, traveling from Boom Town to Boom Town in search of scarce work.
This is what having a 5% Illegal Alien Work Force [and rising] is forcing more and more Union Workers to do.
TO NOT BE HOME OWNERS, OR FAMILY MEN.
To be forced to be in the RACE TO THE BOTTOM THAT ALL UNION BUSTING TRAITORS  WANT TO SEE HAPPEN.
A SHRUNKEN MIDDLE CLASS WITH A THIRD WORLD BANANA REPUBLIC  POPULATION DOING THE LIONS SHARE OF THE WORK.
 
 

LibDave » 01 Sep 2022, 2:08 pm » wrote: ↑

01 Sep 2022, 2:08 pm

Clearly that is the case.  I agree it is illegal and a major problem.  But that's what we get for allowing a brain dead idiot to compromise the election process and take the reigns of power.

So you agree Biden is brain dead.
 

GHETTOBLASTER » 01 Sep 2022, 2:39 pm » wrote: ↑

01 Sep 2022, 2:39 pm

Tell that to Leck Walesa....  
Strong Unions OPEN UP THE MIDDLE CLASS AND THEY HAVE A POSITIVE EFFECT ON THE PREVAILING WAGES OF THE LOCAL ECONOMY
ITO NOT BE HOME OWNERS, OR FAMILY MEN.
To be forced to be in the RACE TO THE BOTTOM THAT ALL UNION BUSTING TRAITORS  WANT TO SEE HAPPEN.
A SHRUNKEN MIDDLE CLASS WITH A THIRD WORLD BANANA REPUBLIC  POPULATION DOING THE LIONS SHARE OF THE WORK.

I take little objection to the rights of workers to collectively bargain.  It is a free country and all are free to enter into whatever contracts (for labor or other) they freely choose without coercion.  You are correct in recognizing the circumstances around the turn of the 20th century.  At that time you had an imbalanced and unfair system in which the industrial barons were not forced to compete for labor in a free and fair market due to unfair trade practices and vertical  and horizontal monopolies in all the major industries.  And this is in fact what brought about the need to collectively bargain.  Eventually the monopolies of the barons were broken up and anti-trust laws were enacted which curtailed such practices to a large extent.  The age of the industrial barons largely ended, though modern versions continuously arise as new technologies and industries arise which aren't so easily identified.  But eventually they fall under the constraints of the anti-trust laws and corrections made.  Often times market forces themselves step in before such actions are fulfilled.
 
 

Where I take exception is the tendency of these same labor unions to fail to extend this same right to those who choose not to collectively bargain. Workers have every right to collectively bargain. But they most certainly do not have the right to deny other workers this same privilege. This recognition by the courts is what brought about the descendancy of labor unions.

Labor unions thrived using the same exact tactics on the other side of the coin the robber barons used. Namely they monopolized the labor side of the equation by preventing other non-union workers from competing with them. To do this they use violent and threatening tactics to drive off any potential competitive labor attempting to exercise the same rights the union labor demands. This was eventually reigned in somewhat by the courts but still occurs to a large extent.

Under normal free market conditions with some workers choosing to collectively bargain, they negotiate for wages commensurate with their skills and the value these skills impart to the employer's products. The wages negotiated must compete against the skills free non-collective labor brings to the table. It is this supply and demand in the labor markets which keeps wages and skills in balance. It is imperative these conditions are maintained in the interest of ALL AMERICANS as it keeps consumers and consumption in balance and all are incentivized and enjoy personal development of one's labor skills.
 

However, labor unions almost without exception attempt to obtain an unfair advantage in exactly the same manner as the robber barons. They use violence and corrupt government influence to monopolize and prevent competition against their labor. In this manner the wages negotiated by unions far exceed the skills they bring to the table. The result is the union labor was able to demand undeserved wages and drive up the commensurate cost of goods for non-collective labor. In short unions hurt the consumer and the US economy by consuming more than they produced. Much more!

What eventually caught up to the unions was changes in market conditions and Clinton's "Globalization Initiative" precluding them from violently commanding a monopoly on all of the labor in their particular industries. They were forced to compete just like the robber barons had been forced to compete by the enacting of antitrust legislation. They had grown accustomed to receiving wages far in excess of their efforts and were slow to realize the party was over. The unions continued to demand unearned wages and ended up bankrupting their employers. Essentially killing the goose that laid the golden egg. In many cases the companies long held hostage by the unions moved their operations elsewhere as capital has the privilege of flowing wherever it is most efficient.
 

FJB » 01 Sep 2022, 3:14 pm » wrote: ↑

01 Sep 2022, 3:14 pm

So you agree Biden is brain dead.

All indications are this certainly appears to be the case.  Stupid is as stupid does.  And "2000 mules" conclusively proves the election was heavily compromised.
 

LibDave » 01 Sep 2022, 3:20 pm » wrote: ↑

01 Sep 2022, 3:20 pm

I take little objection to the rights of workers to collectively bargain.  It is a free country and all are free to enter into whatever contracts (for labor or other) they freely choose without coercion.  You are correct in recognizing the circumstances around the turn of the 20th century.  At that time you had an imbalanced and unfair system in which the industrial barons were not forced to compete for labor in a free and fair market due to unfair trade practices and vertical  and horizontal monopolies in all the major industries.  And this is in fact what brought about the need to collectively bargain.  Eventually the monopolies of the barons were broken up and anti-trust laws were enacted which curtailed such practices to a large extent.  The age of the industrial barons largely ended, though modern versions continuously arise as new technologies and industries arise which aren't so easily identified.  But eventually they fall under the constraints of the anti-trust laws and corrections made.  Often times market forces themselves step in before such actions are fulfilled.

I don't know what you or your children / grandchildren do to earn a living but I can only hope that someday you find yourselves out of work, or  stripped of your fringe benefits, or  bankrupt due to the effects of  ILLEGAL ALIEN LABOR.
 IF YOU PEOPLE THINK THE  GLOBALIST NWO IS ENCOURAGING THE FORCED INVASION OF THIRD WORLD PRIMITIVES INTO THE USA  AND EUROPE TO MAKE OUR SOCIETIES STRONGER / IMPROVE OUR STANDARD OF LIVING / QUALITY OF LIFE....THERE IS NO HOPE FOR ANY OF YOU.


 
 

ConsRule » 01 Sep 2022, 12:28 pm » wrote: ↑

01 Sep 2022, 12:28 pm

That assumes every business owner, that is so unethical they are willing to commit a crime, passes the labor savings on the their customer in the form of lower prices.

Do you really not see the flaw in that logic?

I have long been an advocate of coming down hard on any business that uses illegal labor.  The laws need to be much harsher than they are, the fines need to be much larger and should be levied against the company and the CEO/Owner jointly and severally...along with the employee being deported to their country of origin within 24 hours.

All businesses set their prices according to the law of supply and demand.  Prices are ALWAYS set in an effort to maximize profits (or at least they attempt to do so to the best of their abilities).  To whatever extent they deviate their prices from that optimum price, whether too high or too low, they are losing money they would otherwise obtain at the optimum price.  Producers are not free to raise prices without limit in a competitive market free from monopolization.  The costs of production play no role whatsoever in the optimum price setting.  The laws of supply and demand always determine the optimum price not the cost of production.

The cost of production comes into play when businesses decide what and how much to produce.  If the market forces dictate an optimum price level below the cost of production the business is still forced to set the price of their goods at the optimum market price.  They will just lose money as a penalty for investing limited capital where it would be better invested elsewhere.  This ensures producers watch their expenditures closely and make wise choices in production, saving the nation (and the business\investors) the cost resulting from wasting scarce labor and raw material resources.

 
 

Illegal wetbacks are a net negative to the economy

LibDave » 01 Sep 2022, 3:20 pm » wrote: ↑

01 Sep 2022, 3:20 pm

Where I take exception is the tendency of these same labor unions to fail to extend this same right to those who choose not to collectively bargain. Workers have every right to collectively bargain. But they most certainly do not have the right to deny other workers this same privilege. This recognition by the courts is what brought about the descendancy of labor unions.

 

ALL UNION CONTRACTS ARE BASED ON FREE MARKET / SUPPLY AND DEMAND FACTORS
Can you show proof that the Unions are currently taking  away the rights of NON UNION WORKERS to work...?   
Be careful ..do not provide examples to me  where the Job Site has already been negotiated to be manned by nothing but 100% UNION SIGNATORY COMPANIES / WORKERS. 

Notice that whenever a City or State Prevailing Wage Compliance Officer makes his rounds through the non union job sites...he is there to make sure that all the Non Union Workers are being paid THE PREVAILING UNION SCALE.
THIS NEVER WORKS THE OPPOSITE WAY. 
HEY SCABS....NEXT TIME YOU FIND YOURSELF ON A GOVERNMENT FUNDED PREVAILING WAGE JOB....AND YOU FIND YOURSELF GETTING PAID MORE THAN YOU WERE BEFORE...THANK A UNION BROTHER FOR FIGHTING FOR THE FAT CHECK YOU WERE JUST GIVEN.  
 
 

GHETTOBLASTER » 01 Sep 2022, 5:09 pm » wrote: ↑

01 Sep 2022, 5:09 pm

ALL UNION CONTRACTS ARE BASED ON FREE MARKET / SUPPLY AND DEMAND FACTORS
Can you show proof that the Unions are currently taking  away the rights of NON UNION WORKERS to work...?   
Be careful ..do not provide examples to me  where the Job Site has already been negotiated to be manned by nothing but 100% UNION SIGNATORY COMPANIES / WORKERS. 

Notice that whenever a City or State Prevailing Wage Compliance Officer makes his rounds through the non union job sites...he is there to make sure that all the Non Union Workers are being paid THE PREVAILING UNION SCALE.
THIS NEVER WORKS THE OPPOSITE WAY. 
HEY SCABS....NEXT TIME YOU FIND YOURSELF ON A GOVERNMENT FUNDED PREVAILING WAGE JOB....AND YOU FIND YOURSELF GETTING PAID MORE THAN YOU WERE BEFORE...THANK A UNION BROTHER FOR FIGHTING FOR THE FAT CHECK YOU WERE JUST GIVEN.
 

Union contracts are not normally based on free market forces free from coercion.  Supply and demand maybe, but they use violence or other means to ensure the employers they are negotiating with have no alternative competitive labor as an option.  Furthermore, the whole process only works because not only is this employer forced to negotiate with union labor exclusively, the competitors of that business must also hire union labor exclusively.

LibDave » 01 Sep 2022, 5:44 pm » wrote: ↑

01 Sep 2022, 5:44 pm

Union contracts are not normally based on free market forces free from coercion. 

I dont often ask for links..but I will make an exception here just for you
Put up or shut up.
 

Otherwise, the system wouldn't work to provide unwarranted and inordinate contracts.  The businesses which contract the union labor would go out of business as their costs would exceed the optimum market price. Any attempt to exceed the optimum price would result in consumers purchasing less expensive non-union goods. Through the use of violence, intimidation and graft the unions force all industry producers to utilize only union labor ensuring the consumers have no choice but to pay higher prices than they would in a free labor market. You have expressed this exact motivation repeatedly in your proceeding posts, as if it is unfair for you to have to compete against outside free labor (immigrant or otherwise). This is where the disproportionate wages paid to union workers come from. For instance Ford, GM and Chrysler would all operate under identical union contracts and any attempts to hire non-union labor would result in violent picket lines and intimidation of anyone (so called scabs) who negotiated their own labor contracts. And again you have already expressed this sentiment time and again.

 
 

As for the total self-righteous BS you spouted about City and State Compliance officers you don't get to take the high-ground there. The reason such things exist isn't due to the righteous generosity of union leaders. In many states the ability to use violence or other means to restrict the right for free labor to work was rightfully struck down as unconstitutional and un-American. This power was granted to the states and many states enacted right to work laws. Obviously this meant the union swindle wouldn't work as employers could hire equal or greater skilled more motivated workers without such high unwarranted compensation. In some cases the unions were able to belay this problem by convincing legislators in otherwise Right to Work states (often through legal lobbying bribes) to enact amendments requiring the businesses compensate the free labor equally. They did this under the guise that it would be equivalent to the company treating its employees unequally. But, they didn't do this out of the kindness of their hearts. In essence this still allows the unions to avoid having to compete with free labor and unions are responsible for these state and municipal ordinances. In fact the compliance officers are invariably beholden to the unions and in fact in most instances the union influences in these government bodies select these same compliance officers who enforce the equal pay standards. Most are former union members.  It is all quite corrupt and sickening.
 
 

LibDave » 01 Sep 2022, 5:47 pm » wrote: ↑

01 Sep 2022, 5:47 pm

Otherwise, the system wouldn't work to provide unwarranted and inordinate contracts.  The business which contract the union labor would go out of businesses as their costs would exceed the optimum market price. Any attempt to exceed the optimum price would result in consumers purchasing less expensive non-union goods. Through the use of violence, intimidation and graft the unions force all industry producers to utilize only union labor ensuring the consumers have no choice but to pay higher prices than they would in a free labor market. You have expressed this exact motivation repeatedly in your proceeding posts, as if it is unfair for you to have to compete against outside free labor (immigrant or otherwise). This is where the disproportionate wages paid to union workers come from. For instance Ford, GM and Chrysler would all operate under identical union contracts and any attempts to hire non-union labor would result in violent picket lines and intimidation of anyone (so called scabs) who negotiated their own labor contracts. And again you have already expressed this sentiment time and again.

LibDave » 11 minutes ago » wrote: ↑
11 minutes ago
Union contracts are not normally based on free market forces free from coercion. 

I dont often ask for links..but I will make an exception here just for you
Put up or shut up.

LibDave » 01 Sep 2022, 1:03 pm » wrote: ↑

01 Sep 2022, 1:03 pm

I didn't fail to take those social services into account

And that's all well and good. I agree with most of your comments, but what is unavoidable is your refusal to put the blame squarely where it lies, on Biden's shoulders.  It wouldn't matter a whit what an American-hating scumbag like Soros tells them if Biden wasn't intent on breaking the law himself and making sure his AG is also on board with his own illegal support.  THAT is where the problem lies, nowhere else!

Biden was handed a secure border and an excellent start in getting the wall built by Trump. Biden overturned everything he did, and Democrats and liberals alike cheered him every step of the way until those Democrat-run "sanctuary cities" are now getting a taste of what happens when you elect a scumbag socialist who cares NOTHING about the citizens of this country, just as he annoyingly proclaimed to someone who questioned his policies by stating unequivocally and angrily, "I DON'T WORK FOR YOU!!!"  Not ONE DEM LEADER in any city they run uttered a single word of protest over his illegal actions until they too faced their reality, thanks to Republican governors in border states who loaded thousands of them onto busses heading to their sanctuary cities.  Now, they're all screaming bloody murder!

Since you tag yourself a "lib", it may well be that I'm jaundiced to your finely scripted words where you give him nothing more than a mild rebuke in calling his illegal policies "inhumane". Biden deserves impeachment for his crimes and I suspect you're reluctant to acknowledge that because you voted for him. Frankly, I don't know a single person who calls himself a liberal who DIDN'T vote for Biden, and that disclosure at the onset of your diatribe would have been appropriate. 

 

 
 

Pastafarian » 01 Sep 2022, 10:23 am » wrote: ↑

01 Sep 2022, 10:23 am

Labor unions suffer bcuz Republicans are anti-union, not bcuz of immigrants.

NAILS IT! This is what their corporate masters want!      

GHETTOBLASTER » 01 Sep 2022, 5:46 pm » wrote: ↑

01 Sep 2022, 5:46 pm

I dont often ask for links..but I will make an exception here just for you
Put up or shut up.

You want a link?  How about this from your own mouth.

"Increased competition with untrained, unsafe,  Non Union Scabs"

If they are so untrained and unsafe why do you have a problem with having to compete with them?

And your term Scabs is quite revealing.  I once personally witnessed a 20 year old girl who was so excited to find work at 25$/hour (late 80's) during a UAW strike.  I was a young newly graduated brilliant engineer making 17.50$/hour (the prevailing wage for a non-union engineer).  The union labor started out with not even a high school diploma or any training at 35$/hour and quickly rose to 90$/hour.  Unbelievable benefits to boot.  Average wage when contracts were bid for the union labor was 60$/hr.  And don't get me started on their work habits and job duties!!!

She was pregnant with her third child and was unwed. Smart girl, very pretty and a very hard worker. She thought earning 25$/hour to put resistors into little holes on a PC board at a manufacturing line was a God-send. So much so she was willing to brave the picket lines for the opportunity to make even half what the union was paid for the same work (better). I got to know her over a few weeks during the strike. She had little money and her car was an old broken-down Toyota hoopty.

One day as she was driving off the lot passing the picket lines one of the union instigators from out of town (Detroit) yelled out, "She's driving a Toyota! Get her!!!" He then proceeded to run up to her driver's side window, wielded a tire iron, smashed out her window and then repeatedly stuck her in the head and temple. There were only a few security guards hired by the company at that section of the lot. They attempted to intervene and the guy ran off as the other union members enabled his escape. She suffered devastating injuries and permanent brain damage, lost the baby and her children were orphaned. I was disgusted. Months later after the strike was settled one of the union members put up a photo of her on life support on the bulletin board with the comment, "This is what happens to SCABS. Watch out management or you will be next." What disgusting lowlife pigs. Everyone from the union thought it was a wonderful thing to post and got a big laugh.

So don't tell me about these wonderful union tactics and how righteous they are. I know you first hand and you are probably quite happy to read about what happened to this "SCAB". You are one in the same, cut from the same cloth and choose to get what you haven't earned on the backs of hardworking pregnant mothers through violence and any means necessary.