Port strike and automation

[ZiprHead]

I meant in reality. But yes, they were probably doomed to lose this fight. The government has every reason to want the ports to be open,

Which is why Biden should have invoked Taft-Hartley.

and the workers have every right to demand payment for their work.

Nobody is saying they should not get paid. But they are already very well paid. They want ridiculous amount more (70% pay increase) and no automation in ports, and are using extortion, monopoly power of their union, and an unreasonably friendly White House to get their way.

First time I've heard collective bargaining referenced to as extortion.

Then fix your ears. It most certainly is extortion.

The opposite is slavery. If labor cannot withhold their labor when they feel they aren't being paid enough it's slavery.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Unions basically exist only where there is minimal if any ability to have non-union competition.

So?

If unions don't destroy businesses why have virtually all union businesses that have to compete with non-union businesses been destroyed?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

First time I've heard collective bargaining referenced to as extortion.

Then fix your ears. It most certainly is extortion.

The opposite is slavery. If labor cannot withhold their labor when they feel they aren't being paid enough it's slavery.

The thing is a strike isn't about withholding their labor. It's about being as disruptive to the business as possible. That's extortion. And even with the protections unions get it often crosses the line into extortion. I'm thinking of a case some years back, a newspaper. I forget who was striking, but they tried to sabotage the electricity to stop the printing of the paper--the saboteur died. They blamed the newspaper--meaning they clearly condoned the sabotage.

 

[laughing dog]

Unions basically exist only where there is minimal if any ability to have non-union competition.

So?

If unions don't destroy businesses why have virtually all union businesses that have to compete with non-union businesses been destroyed?

Your claim is unproven.

 

[bilby]

I'm thinking of a case some years back, a newspaper. I forget who was striking...

...and you also forgot that on a rationalist discussion board, that which is asserted without evidence will be dismissed without evidence.

I'm thinking of the dragon in my garage. I forget how I found it... but you should certainly take my word for it that it's real.

 

[bilby]

The thing is a strike isn't about withholding their labor.

Yes, it is. That's the complete and accurate definition of a strike.

 

[barbos]

Then again, greed.

Like the greed of the striking dockworkers making an average of $150k and holding the national economy hostage demanding >70% more money and guarantee that the ports will not modernize and automate?

The horror, the absolute horror that someone wants MORE!!!! Really, what's is the world coming to? How the fuck dare anyone in the USA to want or expect more?

Anyway, those greedy dockworkers have settled (at least until Jan. 15). So the US economy is safe for now from those ungrateful rapacious workers.

Strange how Derek never complains about the greed of the CEO class whose income would make the income of the dock workers look like a pittance.

Actually, it's other way around if you look at the total.

 

[ZiprHead]

Then again, greed.

Like the greed of the striking dockworkers making an average of $150k and holding the national economy hostage demanding >70% more money and guarantee that the ports will not modernize and automate?

The horror, the absolute horror that someone wants MORE!!!! Really, what's is the world coming to? How the fuck dare anyone in the USA to want or expect more?

Anyway, those greedy dockworkers have settled (at least until Jan. 15). So the US economy is safe for now from those ungrateful rapacious workers.

Strange how Derek never complains about the greed of the CEO class whose income would make the income of the dock workers look like a pittance.

Actually, it's other way around if you look at the total.

Which is the wrong way to look at it.

 

[barbos]

Then again, greed.

Like the greed of the striking dockworkers making an average of $150k and holding the national economy hostage demanding >70% more money and guarantee that the ports will not modernize and automate?

The horror, the absolute horror that someone wants MORE!!!! Really, what's is the world coming to? How the fuck dare anyone in the USA to want or expect more?

Anyway, those greedy dockworkers have settled (at least until Jan. 15). So the US economy is safe for now from those ungrateful rapacious workers.

Strange how Derek never complains about the greed of the CEO class whose income would make the income of the dock workers look like a pittance.

Actually, it's other way around if you look at the total.

Which is the wrong way to look at it.

Not really. And for you to be consistent you should look at pay of other groups of people who are paid much less than these union workers first. Seriously, these union assholes earn more than tenured professors and slightly less than medical doctors.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

First time I've heard collective bargaining referenced to as extortion.

Then fix your ears. It most certainly is extortion.

The opposite is slavery. If labor cannot withhold their labor when they feel they aren't being paid enough it's slavery.

The thing is a strike isn't about withholding their labor.

Actually it is. It about leveraging your collective value to management... to remind them what it is that makes the company of any value.

It's about being as disruptive to the business as possible. That's extortion.

Yeah, businesses used these arguments in the 19th century too. Luckily the national guard isn't called out to shoot the protestors.

And even with the protections unions get it often crosses the line into extortion. I'm thinking of a case some years back, a newspaper. I forget who was striking, but they tried to sabotage the electricity to stop the printing of the paper--the saboteur died.

That isn't a strike or extortion... that is sabotage! Just because someone does something in some case doesn't mean it becomes some magical broad brush for other striking forces.

These people want to continue to work, some of it highly technical and some of it, very critical for our economy. They want to be able to be paid. They want to be able to do it for as long as they want.

I am confused as to why you can't understand that labor would want to remain labor and their interests might not exactly match up with those of big business.

 

[ZiprHead]

Then again, greed.

Like the greed of the striking dockworkers making an average of $150k and holding the national economy hostage demanding >70% more money and guarantee that the ports will not modernize and automate?

The horror, the absolute horror that someone wants MORE!!!! Really, what's is the world coming to? How the fuck dare anyone in the USA to want or expect more?

Anyway, those greedy dockworkers have settled (at least until Jan. 15). So the US economy is safe for now from those ungrateful rapacious workers.

Strange how Derek never complains about the greed of the CEO class whose income would make the income of the dock workers look like a pittance.

Actually, it's other way around if you look at the total.

Which is the wrong way to look at it.

Not really. And for you to be consistent you should look at pay of other groups of people who are paid much less than these union workers first. Seriously, these union assholes earn more than tenured professors.

I agree professors should be paid more.

 

[barbos]

I agree professors should be paid more.

Incorrect. Professors should be paid more and these unions assholes less than they are now.

 

[ZiprHead]

I agree professors should be paid more.

Incorrect. Professors should be paid more and these unions assholes less than they are now.

Incorrect. All of the lower classes should be paid more. The top 1 percent are sucking up the majority of the wealth generated in this country and the rest of us are getting scraps. Ther 400 richest families pay a lower tax rate than the middle class, by design.

36% of jobs were union jobs in the late 50s, early 60s. Now it 6%. The decline of good union jobs matches the decline of the middle and lower classes incomes in relation to the richest. The right, besides enacting state anti union laws such as Right To Work (for less) have convinced many that they don't need unions. They can just pull themselves up by their bootstraps and be rich just like Musk, Bezos, Buffett, et al. Self made (bullshit) billionaires.

This is one thing I agree with the MAGAts on. The country has turned away from the little guy. They think billionaire Trump is the cure for the wealth inequality that has taken over the nation and stagnated the growth of the middle class. They think the guy that screwed so many workers and vendors in New York that no one there will work for him anymore. They're delusional.

 

[Axulus]

Labor share of GDP is 69%, so capital gets 31% share. If everyone got a 45% pay raise then capital share would be 0.

If there was no capital then labor would get something like $500/year (the approximate amount produced per capita in counties with almost no capital investment).

What is the appropriate share for capital given that the current level makes labor something like 150 times more productive, and labor gets something like 100x higher wages compared to not having access to that capital?

 

[ZiprHead]

Labor share of GDP is 69%, so capital gets 31% share. If everyone got a 45% pay raise then capital share would be 0.

If there was no capital then labor would get something like $500/year (the approximate amount produced per capita in counties with almost no capital investment).

What is the appropriate share for capital given that the current level makes labor something like 150 times more productive, and labor gets something like 100x higher wages compared to not having access to that capital?

GDP doesn't fully measure wealth. My concern is not productivity, it's wealth distribution. Productivity has risen greatly yet wages have stagnated for the lower and middle classes.

 

[barbos]

Incorrect. All of the lower classes should be paid more

Really? You think that lower class scum is underpaid ?

 

[ZiprHead]

Incorrect. All of the lower classes should be paid more

Really? You think that lower class scum is underpaid ?

I don't know what "that" refers to but...

Labor’s share of national income—that is, the amount of GDP paid out in wages, salaries, and benefits—has been declining in developed and, to a lesser extent, emerging economies since the 1980s. This has raised concerns about slowing income growth, inequality, and loss of the consumer purchasing power that is needed to fuel demand in the economy. The decline has been much discussed and the rising power of companies vis-à-vis workers—whether from new technology, globalization, the hollowing out of labor unions, or market consolidation—has shaped much of that discussion.

A new look at the declining labor share of income in the United States

Oft-cited factors like globalization, technology, and others may not be painting the full picture in the waning labor share of income.

www.mckinsey.com

 

[barbos]

I don't know what "that" refers to but...

You don't know? It refers to port union workers who want to be paid >200K.

 

[barbos]

Labor’s share of national income—that is, the amount of GDP paid out in wages, salaries, and benefits—has been declining in developed and, to a lesser extent, emerging economies since the 1980s. This has raised concerns about slowing income growth, inequality, and loss of the consumer purchasing power that is needed to fuel demand in the economy. The decline has been much discussed and the rising power of companies vis-à-vis workers—whether from new technology, globalization, the hollowing out of labor unions, or market consolidation—has shaped much of that discussion.

A new look at the declining labor share of income in the United States

Oft-cited factors like globalization, technology, and others may not be painting the full picture in the waning labor share of income.

www.mckinsey.com

Utterly imbecilic garbage. It declined becasue of decline in number of people involved in that becasue of automation.

 

[laughing dog]

It is simply not possible for that labor's share of GDP in the US since the 1980s because of people are being replaced by automation because THERE ARE MORE PEOPLE WORKING.