Wealth Inequality in America

they cause non-unionized competitors to pay competitive wages in order to compete for good workers.

provide one side-by-side union to non-union example of how this has been good for a US industry as opposed to resulting in the rampant outsourcing of labor outside the US.
 


of course the Party of Unintended Consequences would never own up to perpetuating the offshoring of labor... they just bitch. signs and rallys about the problem they created... again, and again... and again. because signs (and outdated graphs) cure things.
 
only chart that matters ITT

b4byid.png
 
Wrong. What unions do is equalize pay, which means some workers get paid more than they're worth and some get paid less than they're worth. This incentivizes people to do less work, since you're going to get paid the same regardless.

I've seen it both ways. I am anti-union and was in one for a couple years in an industry that one wouldn't think was a union job. It was a sales job so there were checks and balances in sales and also conduct (fuck up 3 times you're out or don't meet your quota for 3 months you're out kinda deal). Starting pay was determined by experience and you got automatic raises 2 times a year until you capped out and then got a cost of living raise only once a year. It was actually pretty easy to get canned unlike most union jobs. The turnover was pretty heavy. I think that model worked out for the most part with all the checks and balances. You couldn't be a lazy fuck and keep your gig for long.

This example is very out of the norm. My dad negotiates union contracts for a company in a small town and the starting pay is probably double of any other job in town, at least. The jobs aren't highly skilled either. He always tells me about the negotiations and how they always want more and more. Stupid vacation days like Presidents Day and shit like that. Unfortunately, this is generally what I have heard from friends that have been in union companies. Granted, they are usually management employees but over double the wage in a small shit town with awesome healthcare and a ton of vacation, fuck.

Basically, there are positives with a union but I think for most companies with contract negotiations every couple of years or so things get out of hand. When its hard as shit to get fired because of you being protected that breads laziness in most people.
 
Guess which of the group goes to church regularly. My dear friends most of the top rich families are deep into black magic or whatever name you care to call it.

you're not a very good troll. though i'd imagine in a troll's union, you'd still get work on account of your dues.
 
provide one side-by-side union to non-union example of how this has been good for a US industry as opposed to resulting in the rampant outsourcing of labor outside the US.

If my graphs are so outdated, feel free to post newer ones. That would be a great start. Simply providing unsupported and passive-aggressive rhetoric , while asking me to provide MORE data is a tad lazy. That so many jobs have been moved overseas even though unions have been cut down to 1/3 of their size and now exist mostly in the public sector should provide an answer to your implication that unions are responsible for such.
 
Wrong. What unions do is equalize pay, which means some workers get paid more than they're worth and some get paid less than they're worth. This incentivizes people to do less work, since you're going to get paid the same regardless.


That really depends on the type of job. Many union jobs have increased pay based on skill sets. Increased pay and advancement comes with new skills/expertise in needed areas. Outside of a few anecdotes (usually from angry anti-union people with an ideological bent) I haven’t seen any evidence that unionization hurts productivity. As you can see, GDP hasn’t grown any faster as unions have declined. The chart itself correlates GDP growth with the top marginal tax rates (which have been slashed over the last 40+ years) and shows no correlating increase in the rate of GDP growth. But the reason I’m showing this is that this lack of faster GDP growth also coincides with the gutting of unions (from 30% to about 13% of the economy).

86_marginalgrowth.jpg.CROP.original-original.jpg
 
If my graphs are so outdated, feel free to post newer ones. That would be a great start.

Actually, a great start would include dated and relevant information. You're on a forum of entrepreneurs bro, good luck arguing that unions are good.

sry 4 teh rehtoric
 
I think the growing wealth disparity gap has to do with the "union" of people who live on welfare and never see a need to get off it. Productive society members are becoming more successful and tend to have less children because they don't get paid to do so. Middle class folks either up their game to climb higher or they fall back into the pit when they are too old to fight. So the middle class is moving up and it's moving down. The bottom is growing as middle classer's decide "why fight it?" it's a decision made very easy by a government that will pay your rent, utilities, food costs, health care, childcare costs, phone bill and even give you a little spending cash allowance. Yes, our poor need more help and protection, tell me moar.
 
Actually, a great start would include dated and relevant information. You're on a forum of entrepreneurs bro, good luck arguing that unions are good.

sry 4 teh rehtoric

Actually, I would be satisfied if people would just stay on topic and not veer off into red herrings. I've simply stated that union-busting has helped cause this disparity in income (not that they were "good"). And that was really just in response to someone asking me how I think the disparity came about and how it can be turned back (or at least dialed down).

The point of this thread was apparently to point out that such a disparity existed, and that most people don't seem to know about it. I was simply providing more info on that. I suppose I could take the time to provide more recent information but the conversation here is quick and sloppy and there's a lot of opinion-slinging, so it's tough to justify putting the extra time into this. I do have clients!
 
Actually, a great start would include dated and relevant information. You're on a forum of entrepreneurs bro, good luck arguing that unions are good.

sry 4 teh rehtoric

You do bring up a good point about entrepreneurs and their takes on unions. I think people have a difficult time realize that different people have different strengths and weaknesses. Your standard employee and entrepreneur are a different breed of character, and I think the latter often has a tough time realizing this.
 
If my graphs are so outdated, feel free to post newer ones. That would be a great start. Simply providing unsupported and passive-aggressive rhetoric , while asking me to provide MORE data is a tad lazy. That so many jobs have been moved overseas even though unions have been cut down to 1/3 of their size and now exist mostly in the public sector should provide an answer to your implication that unions are responsible for such.

its not really a question of IF, they're a decade old.

yeah, i'll get right on the task of updating your weakass graphs. working on that now.
 
I'm going to wager intelligence and common sense hold wealth (plus some lucky, true hardworking), and the uneducated and lazy hold none (and some unlucky, true hardworking).
 
Combine this with the stuff from lukep and others:

- when most people own nothing
- only view nearly all
- and a view control through wealth

What happens when the financial system collapse?

If that would happen under that circumstances in simulated enviroments then i would not speak from a collapse but from a reset.