 
Support Wrong Planet Awareness!
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Who is at Fault for the Decline of American Labor? |
| Labor Unions, and their extortionist tactics. |
|
11% |
[ 5 ] |
| Corporations, and their emphasis of profitability. |
|
40% |
[ 17 ] |
| Politicians, and their corrupted morality. |
|
23% |
[ 10 ] |
| Consumers, and their lack of patriotic vision. |
|
4% |
[ 2 ] |
| Foreigners, and their concern for their own advancement. |
|
2% |
[ 1 ] |
| Journalists, and their focus on only the bad news. |
|
4% |
[ 2 ] |
| There is no problem ... there is no problem ... there is no problem ... |
|
11% |
[ 5 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 42 |
|
| Author |
Message |
Fnord
Metasyntactic Variable
Joined: May 07, 2008
Posts: 3658
Location: Pantopia
|
 Posted: Fri Jul 11, 2008 3:44 pm Post subject: Who is at Fault for the Decline of American Labor? |
 |
|
I remember when labor unions were very powerful. Sure, some were riddled with organized crime, stole their workers’ pension funds, intimidated and occasionally killed reformers, and were among of the most vicious opponents of equal opportunity. Yet, everything seemed to be running well, especially if you were a union worker.
Then those darned skeptics began going around and telling whoever would listen that unions were driving high inflation rates and would eventually price their very own workers out of the market, and that corruption and disruptive strikes alienated the public and inspired domestic consumers to purchase foreign goods.
"Stop picking on us!" cried the unionists. "We're the best! Everything is just fine! Stop stirring up trouble!"
So now unions are in a shambles, factories are closed or closing, and jobs are being exported to other countries.
Who is at fault; the unions for over-pricing their labor and over-extending their negotiated benefits, or the corporations for responding to this legalized extortion with plant closings and outsourcing, or ... ?
_________________
The leaders of the American automobile industry have been amazingly consistent in their management philosophy, in that they have never missed an opportunity to miss an opportunity. |
|
| Back to top |
|
MissPickwickian
Phoenix
Joined: Nov 27, 2007
Age: 16
Posts: 953
Location: Tennessee
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 11, 2008 4:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I blame the butterfly.
"No one ever suspects the butterfly."----Bart Simpson
_________________
It's the microbes' world. We're just living in it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
t0
Velociraptor
Joined: Mar 24, 2008
Posts: 473
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 11, 2008 4:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I think it's more related to changing values in the American family. Children have been told that they're all special and that they deserve everything they want without having to work for it. Then the parents spoil them and the kids expect the same behavior from everyone.
I talked to a client of mine about a week ago and he was telling me about his last attempt to hire an entry level tech for his business. He's located in a large American city and interviewed a lot of people for the job. He was mainly looking for someone with potential that he could train - not someone who already knew everything. The Americans he interviewed were more concerned about pay and benefits and were upset by what he had to offer. When he interviewed a native Mexican (legally in the US) the Mexican asked for 1 thing: The opportunity to prove his worth.
Guess who got the job. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Fnord
Metasyntactic Variable
Joined: May 07, 2008
Posts: 3658
Location: Pantopia
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 11, 2008 4:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
t0,
That is what I call "An over-inflated and unrealistic sense of entitlement." It's exhibited by the kind of people who want to step out of their mother's basement and in to the corner office on the top floor, and only because they feel that such a a position is owed to then just for being alive.
"Entitlements" ... PFEH! 
_________________
The leaders of the American automobile industry have been amazingly consistent in their management philosophy, in that they have never missed an opportunity to miss an opportunity. |
|
| Back to top |
|
krex
Phoenix
Joined: Jun 21, 2006
Age: 45
Posts: 4995
Location: Village of the Damned
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 11, 2008 5:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It isn't one "thing" but a system that feeds itself. If I had to blame something, it would be the greed inherent in some people that allows them to over-look the bigger picture. Much to complicated to explain in a forum format.
_________________
Just because one plane is flying out of formation, doesnt mean the formation is on course....R.D.Lang
Visit my crafts store
http://www.etsy.com/shop.php?user_id=5412685 |
|
| Back to top |
|
megarat
Hummingbird
Joined: Mar 03, 2008
Posts: 21
Location: Squirt Island, USA, Earth
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 11, 2008 6:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I think the subject of this thread, as written, is an incorrect way to frame the debate.
Instead of "Who is at Fault for the Decline of American Labor?" it should be "What is the cause of the Decline of American Labor?"
The simple answer would be: capitalism and free trade.
The current subject is finger-pointing and trying to find someone to blame. It is also implying that the decline of American labor a bad thing. Is it?
This is likely the viewpoint of the American worker who is out of a job. Empirically, the impact of relocating some manufacturing and technology services overseas has had a relatively negligible impact on the American economy (at least in terms of economic growth), but it has created a massive growth boom throughout much of Asia that has benefited millions -- and possibly even billions of people. That tiny bit of growth has made a massive impact; while those people still don't have the quality of life that we do in the states, they are much better off then they were before those jobs became available.
In an open economic system (such as 90% of the world), everything sinks to the bottom. If someone else can do your job for less, they will try. And if that person gets your job, someone else will still come along and try to do it for even less. This cycle repeats until the processes are as affordable as they can possibly get. The economies of poor countries converge with those of rich countries, but never really catch up, as the wealthy countries are always growing as well.
(And closed economic systems stagnate, since exports fuel growth. So an open economic system is a good thing.)
This is a reality that most people prefer to live in denial of, when they should be proactive about adapting. As fnord stated, many people have an inflated sense of their own worth, and I complete agree with this. If you are doing a job that anyone can do with minimal training, or can be automated, then you shouldn't be shocked when your job is replaced by either a machine or someone willing to do it for less.
And while it's true that corporations worry about profits before people, that's actually the fault of the system. Corporations are legally -- literally, it is against the law for them to do otherwise -- obligated to maximize the return for their stockholders. I agree that the system sucks, but I suspect that things wouldn't change much even if that law was changed. The people in charge still like to make as much money as possible, if for any other reason than to stay competitive. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Fnord
Metasyntactic Variable
Joined: May 07, 2008
Posts: 3658
Location: Pantopia
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 11, 2008 6:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| megarat wrote: |
In an open economic system (such as 90% of the world), everything sinks to the bottom. If someone else can do your job for less, they will try. And if that person gets your job, someone else will still come along and try to do it for even less. This cycle repeats until the processes are as affordable as they can possibly get. The economies of poor countries converge with those of rich countries, but never really catch up, as the wealthy countries are always growing as well.
|
I disagree, but only in perspective. It is not so much that everything sinks to the bottom, it's that the anchors holding America's economy down are still in place as the tide of economic fluidity grows for the rest of the world.
In the past, America could count on (1) foreign economies being much weaker, (2) foreign labor being much cheaper, and (3) only America being able to afford or exploit the resources of other countries.
Now, with China, Russia, and other formerly thrid-world economies growing, their governments and people are becoming more competition to the virtual monopoly that America once had on the global economy.
America and its labor unions may still be the biggest bullies on the block, but the other kids are growing up fast.
_________________
The leaders of the American automobile industry have been amazingly consistent in their management philosophy, in that they have never missed an opportunity to miss an opportunity. |
|
| Back to top |
|
krex
Phoenix
Joined: Jun 21, 2006
Age: 45
Posts: 4995
Location: Village of the Damned
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 11, 2008 6:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Megarat...you need to do some research on what this industrial boon has done TO the people working those jobs and their environment. Many of the laborers are very exploited and the country is ruining it's ecology with poor or absent environmental standards. The rivers that the countries depend on are full of toxic waste and there are growing "cancer villages" because the villagers have no choice but to use this water. If you think it doesn't impacts those of us buying the products...consider the amount of food products that we import from these countries...You are what you eat.
The solution is not to destroy someone else's environment and exploit it's workers while lowering the living standards of the society who is buying it's products because it is all they can afford to buy because their own income has gone down. This leads to nothing but a small number of people getting rich off the suffering and exploitation of the masses while destroying the worlds ecological system.
American industry will never be able to compete with countries who have a different economy, (can live on less because products are cheaper), who have fewer environmental and labor laws . This is not an equalizing factor. Short term thinking just leads to long term problems.
_________________
Just because one plane is flying out of formation, doesnt mean the formation is on course....R.D.Lang
Visit my crafts store
http://www.etsy.com/shop.php?user_id=5412685 |
|
| Back to top |
|
megarat
Hummingbird
Joined: Mar 03, 2008
Posts: 21
Location: Squirt Island, USA, Earth
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 11, 2008 8:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Krex,
I'm not ignorant of the effects of industrialization on the developing world. In fact, I'm acutely aware of it, and it needs to be taken into perspective with our own industrial history. In this regard, these countries are roughly a century behind us, and we were no better off then. They are called the "developing world" for a reason. This applies to both workers' rights and environmental control, and personally I think you are generalizing the worst cases into representative examples.
Re: environment. People only care about the environment when their more-pressing concerns (health, money, family) have reached a comfortable steady state. It's true that some of these manufacturing firms are cutting costs by cutting environmental corners, and that western corporations are profiting from this while turning a blind eye. Yes, I agree, those corporations suck (as well as the system that legally requires corporations to shirk environmental responsibility in favor of profits). At the same time, we can't expect to hold other countries to western-level environmental standards when they have issues with starvation. When our own country (I'm assuming that you're American; I apologize if you're not) can't commit to a major international environmental accord, then how can we expect these poorer countries to follow our good example?
Re: workers' rights. It sounds to me like you're stating that those workers in developing countries are worse off than they are without these industries. Looking at the statistics, this is absolutely not the case, and any claim to the contrary is naive. The downstream effects are stunning ... these firms are creating lots of jobs -- especially employment opportunities that didn't previously exist for women -- and this is leading to trends in better education, better health, better infant mortality rates, better child-to-parent ratios ... the list goes on. These are good things.
(I'm not saying that these workers have the same rights and conditions that the developed world does. Again, compare to the early 20th century. (Anyone not sobered by reading "The Jungle" by U. Sinclair needs to have their head examined.) These societies are trying to find a middle ground between being economically competitive and humanly fair. They can't get there in one step, they need internal and external pressure. And when you have absolutely (or close to) nothing, even a crappy manufacturing job is considered a blessing.)
I'm not trying to make generalizations that are 100% rosy. There certainly are egregious situations that shouldn't be ignored (such as the new role played by Asia in disposing of the rest of the world's computers, which has created a localized environmental disaster), but the "negative hype" does more to sell t-shirts than it does to represent reality. The situation is not 100% calamitous; these countries hare having some growing pains, but are on the right path and they need some time (and help) to fully arrive. To expect otherwise is presumptuous.
I don't know what your educational background on this subject is, but I would recommend reading a few books about economic development that I, personally, found particularly illuminating:
"The End of Poverty" by J. Sachs (a left-wing perspective)
"The White Man's Burden" by W. Easterly (a right-wing perspective)
"The Bottom Billion" by P. Collier (a centric perspective)
(And for the record, in case this gets politicized, I'm not a right-wing, pro-capitalism, pro-consumerism wingnut ... rather I'm a supremely pro-environmental lefty who has been to roughly 30 countries, over two-thirds of which are regarded as the developing world.) |
|
| Back to top |
|
krex
Phoenix
Joined: Jun 21, 2006
Age: 45
Posts: 4995
Location: Village of the Damned
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 11, 2008 9:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
You are right that individuals first concern is for health, food, and family but those are the very things being threatened by the industrialization of China. There health is threatened by the long term effects of working in unregulated industries with chemicals we have out-lawed. Their health is at risk from the toxification of the very water and land they require for food and water. How long have they had this increase in industrialization and we are already seeing the effects of the increase in cancer in their country. You think women having jobs is an advancement. These women have always worked hard and they are simply falling into the same trap many Americans families have...A family that once could be supported by one income, now takes two. Doubling the work force benefits no one but the industries who can pay half the price for a worker. Education...for what ? There are a limited amount of jobs that require an education. Do they need to learn to read so they can be sold more products or be better brain washed by their government ? We have a fairly typical education system here but I don't notice it decreasing the incidence of depression or anxiety in our population. It hasn't increased the general intellectual curiosity of the individuals I have met.
This is over simplification because of the nature of "forums". I not big on wearing T-shirts to promote over simplified slogans. I am just trying to play devils advocate. I would recommend some reading to you. I am not sure of the month but I recently read a very interesting article on China a few Months ago in National Geographic.
China's economic issue are more a matter of having a larger population then their land mass can provide for or poor distribution of resources. Decreasing infant mortality is hardly a solution but I guess polluting their water source might help with that issue but I don't personally want a cheap toaster at that cost.
_________________
Just because one plane is flying out of formation, doesnt mean the formation is on course....R.D.Lang
Visit my crafts store
http://www.etsy.com/shop.php?user_id=5412685 |
|
| Back to top |
|
Izaak
Squeeky Bathtime Companion
Joined: Jun 11, 2007
Posts: 1154
Location: Perth, Western Australia
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 11, 2008 10:05 pm Post subject: Re: Who is at Fault for the Decline of American Labor? |
|
|
| Fnord wrote: | | I remember when labor unions were very powerful. Sure, some were riddled with organized crime, stole their workers’ pension funds, intimidated and occasionally killed reformers, and were among of the most vicious opponents of equal opportunity. Yet, everything seemed to be running well, especially if you were a union worker. |
That's your idea of everything running well? That it hasn't fallen to pieces YET is perfect proof that it works?
I picked "union" because they bear the brunt of the consequences so should have known better. However I would have rather said the problem lays at the foot of the philosophers and intellectuals that made the whole shoddy thing possible, and made them think they could get away with it.
As for corporations seeking the best return for their dollar. I say good on them, they shouldn't have to put up with the crap that unions shovel. |
|
| Back to top |
|
pezar
Sea Gull
Joined: Apr 06, 2008
Age: 33
Posts: 237
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 11, 2008 11:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| t0 wrote: | I think it's more related to changing values in the American family. Children have been told that they're all special and that they deserve everything they want without having to work for it. Then the parents spoil them and the kids expect the same behavior from everyone.
I talked to a client of mine about a week ago and he was telling me about his last attempt to hire an entry level tech for his business. He's located in a large American city and interviewed a lot of people for the job. He was mainly looking for someone with potential that he could train - not someone who already knew everything. The Americans he interviewed were more concerned about pay and benefits and were upset by what he had to offer. When he interviewed a native Mexican (legally in the US) the Mexican asked for 1 thing: The opportunity to prove his worth.
Guess who got the job. |
The problem is, the spoiled brat losers ruin it for the rest of us. I'm much like the Mexican in your story-just let me prove myself, I don't give a crap about pay and benefits and vacations and kissing my ass. I also don't have much of a work history because of my Aspergers. People look at my resume and think one of two things:
1) He's the King of Losers; if we hire him he'll make our lives a living hell.
2) He must be disabled, therefore he's looking to get rich via lawsuit. No thanks.
So my resume goes in the trash. Finally I decided to start my own business. They won't hire me, fine, I'll hire myself. I never get the chance to plead my case. They glance at my resume and say next. Americans are, in general, lazy. This has always been true-Benjamin Franklin said it in 1780-whatever, and said that unless Americans turned into saints the country would never industrialize. The ultimate solution was to import workers, starting with the Irish, then Chinese, then Eastern Europeans, and finally Latinos. As each group gets assimilated they get lazy and whiny. This eventually leads to millions of twentysomethings who won't work unless they can start at the top. So they go on welfare. There are so many people on welfare now that it threatens to sink the country.
American history is chock full of people not working until it became a case of work or starve, starting with Jamestown. Out of 6,000 colonists transported, 1,277 lived. The rest died while searching for gold. Or ran off and joined the Indians. Or just starved, period. That's a survival rate of around 18%. Yikes. It didn't get any better. Gold miners in California fought over eggs for $10 per egg because they wanted to mine rather than grow food. In the 1920s, Henry Ford said "The average man won't do an honest day's work unless he is caught and can't get out of it." When the Depression rolled around, Ford blamed lazy workers.
Starting 50 years ago, Americans showed a preference for obscenely highly paid, obscenely low labor office jobs. So manufacturing was shipped to Asia. Today, people would rather collect government welfare checks than work. Honestly, I don't know why America didn't end up like say Bolivia or Venezuela where people literally live in caves. |
|
| Back to top |
|
MissPickwickian
Phoenix
Joined: Nov 27, 2007
Age: 16
Posts: 953
Location: Tennessee
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 12, 2008 2:10 pm Post subject: Re: Who is at Fault for the Decline of American Labor? |
|
|
| Izaak wrote: | | Fnord wrote: | | I remember when labor unions were very powerful. Sure, some were riddled with organized crime, stole their workers’ pension funds, intimidated and occasionally killed reformers, and were among of the most vicious opponents of equal opportunity. Yet, everything seemed to be running well, especially if you were a union worker. |
That's your idea of everything running well? That it hasn't fallen to pieces YET is perfect proof that it works?
I picked "union" because they bear the brunt of the consequences so should have known better. However I would have rather said the problem lays at the foot of the philosophers and intellectuals that made the whole shoddy thing possible, and made them think they could get away with it.
As for corporations seeking the best return for their dollar. I say good on them, they shouldn't have to put up with the crap that unions shovel. |
Do you work at a company with an active union, or one that had an active union in the past? Do you get benefits? Ta-da!
Liberals do overestimate the morality of the worker, but libertarians overestimate the morality of everyone. Humans are mean bastards. We can do good things, but we need structure. In times when corporations have been given the chance to use slave or near-slave labor, they have almost always exploited it. It's not that they're any meaner than you or me. It's that they're human. And humans are mean bastards.
_________________
It's the microbes' world. We're just living in it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Fnord
Metasyntactic Variable
Joined: May 07, 2008
Posts: 3658
Location: Pantopia
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 12, 2008 3:02 pm Post subject: Re: Who is at Fault for the Decline of American Labor? |
|
|
| Izaak wrote: | | Fnord wrote: | | I remember when labor unions were very powerful. Sure, some were riddled with organized crime, stole their workers’ pension funds, intimidated and occasionally killed reformers, and were among of the most vicious opponents of equal opportunity. Yet, everything seemed to be running well, especially if you were a union worker. |
That's your idea of everything running well? That it hasn't fallen to pieces YET is perfect proof that it works? |
Please note the word "seemed" in bold letters above. This implies that people perceived things to be running well, in spite of the unionists' dirty tricks. It has fallen to pieces. Fifty years ago, a person could not get a decent-paying blue-collar job unless they joined a union. Nowadays, unions are involved in less than 13% of all Blue-Collar labor in America. Plus, more than half of all Blue-Collar industries have experienced massive lay-offs and plant closings. Imho, unions have priced themselves out of the global market, and those few that are still hanging on are about to lose their remaining grip.
| Izaak wrote: | I picked "union" because they bear the brunt of the consequences so should have known better. However I would have rather said the problem lays at the foot of the philosophers and intellectuals that made the whole shoddy thing possible, and made them think they could get away with it.
As for corporations seeking the best return for their dollar. I say good on them, they shouldn't have to put up with the crap that unions shovel. |
It is not the intellectuals who are at fault, it is the laborers for being exploitable, and the unionists and the corporations for exploiting them.
_________________
The leaders of the American automobile industry have been amazingly consistent in their management philosophy, in that they have never missed an opportunity to miss an opportunity. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Awesomelyglorious
Destroyer of worlds, reaver of souls
Joined: Dec 18, 2005
Posts: 6120
Location: United States
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 12, 2008 5:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| MissPickwickian wrote: |
Liberals do overestimate the morality of the worker, but libertarians overestimate the morality of everyone. Humans are mean bastards. We can do good things, but we need structure. In times when corporations have been given the chance to use slave or near-slave labor, they have almost always exploited it. It's not that they're any meaner than you or me. It's that they're human. And humans are mean bastards. |
I would instead argue that libertarians overestimate the human tendency towards spontaneous order. Many libertarians argue based upon, or hold to, egoist conceptions of humanity. Some of course hold to the concept of spontaneous welfare as well, others do not care about the issue. Humans are selfish bastards, to call corporations or people mean is to imply that they care, and frankly, caring is not something that they do.
Btw, long time, no see! 
Also, I would blame unions overpricing themselves, the bad strategies of US industry, foreign competition, and increasing technology for the weakening. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
