Shady Posted June 19, 2011 Report Share Posted June 19, 2011 I didn't read it that way at all. I guess we can agree to disagree. But when he says "productivity is really less people doing more work for less money", I'm not sure how that can be interpreted any other way but in a negative fashion. Not to mention it's completely wrong. Jack's war on ATM machines, kiosks, assembly lines, computers and technology is assinine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty Posted June 19, 2011 Report Share Posted June 19, 2011 Because that argument is asinine. Air Canada revenue is over 2.5 billion a quarter and you guys think the CEO getting paid 4 million a year is the reason the company was nearly bankrupt. Yeah Lol! Imagine him thinking the management had something to do with whether a company suceeded or not! LOL. It's not like management gets to make any decisions or anything! Lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty Posted June 19, 2011 Report Share Posted June 19, 2011 It's the "submission to authority" issues that permeate conservative thought that allows this to happen... And here I thought I was a conservative... yet that hardly describes me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty Posted June 19, 2011 Report Share Posted June 19, 2011 Union Jack Weber. His is a typical union mentality though. Less work for more pay. Isn't capitalism about maximizing your returns? Doesn't every company charge the most it can get away with for its goods and services? Why should you expect workers to follow a different path? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bloodyminded Posted June 19, 2011 Report Share Posted June 19, 2011 I guess we can agree to disagree. But when he says "productivity is really less people doing more work for less money", I'm not sure how that can be interpreted any other way but in a negative fashion. Not to mention it's completely wrong. Well, no; I think it's pretty clear that he is disputing the paradigm as it is sometimes discussed, not "productivity" in some objective sense of the word. For example, if a specific political leader, say, one I don't trust, talks of democratic values, I might say something like, "Democratic values means cronyism and secretive government." And in the context of the discussion being waged, you'd understand I'm not literally claiming any such thing about "democratic values," but rather implying I don't buy into the way the words are being used. Further, I'm having trouble believing you didn't immediately understand this, frankly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bloodyminded Posted June 19, 2011 Report Share Posted June 19, 2011 Isn't capitalism about maximizing your returns? Doesn't every company charge the most it can get away with for its goods and services? Why should you expect workers to follow a different path? Ah, good point. Why indeed? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted June 19, 2011 Report Share Posted June 19, 2011 Isn't capitalism about maximizing your returns? Doesn't every company charge the most it can get away with for its goods and services? Why should you expect workers to follow a different path? No...this is Economics 101. The amount "charged" is usually driven by price elasticity of demand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonam Posted June 19, 2011 Report Share Posted June 19, 2011 Ah, good point. Why indeed? I wouldn't. Workers should certainly strive to maximize their rewards for their work. For many workers, particularly those who perform jobs that are more than unskilled labour, getting the most return can actually be done outside of a union. More importantly, though, we frown on collusion between corporations. When many companies band together and try to set prices higher than they would otherwise be, people get very angry, and moreover, such collusion tends to be banned by law. Nonetheless, people frequently accuse oil companies or gas stations or whatever of collusion. Plainly, society wants companies to compete openly, driving down the prices of their products, rather than colluding to set their prices and cooperatively reaping higher profits. Why is this so? Tell me, why do we not like corporations colluding to set prices? And yet, on the other hand, the same people who are first to accuse corporations of such practices tend to be the first to support unions. What are unions? Nothing more than workers colluding with each other to set the price of their labour higher than what it would otherwise be worth. Why is this acceptable when it comes to workers? Either price collusion is something economic entities should be allowed to do in order to further their own benefit, or it is something they should not be allowed to do in order to ensure efficient markets. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilber Posted June 19, 2011 Report Share Posted June 19, 2011 (edited) And yet, on the other hand, the same people who are first to accuse corporations of such practices tend to be the first to support unions. What are unions? Nothing more than workers colluding with each other to set the price of their labour higher than what it would otherwise be worth. They are both entities made up of many people doing business with each other. Companies do business with each other. Companies and governments do business with each other. So do companies and unions. They aren't colluding to fix prices, they are bargaining to get the best price they can. By your logic, we should also ban co-ops or any other group of people who act together in order to get a better price on something. Edited June 19, 2011 by Wilber Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CPCFTW Posted June 19, 2011 Report Share Posted June 19, 2011 (edited) I wouldn't. Workers should certainly strive to maximize their rewards for their work. For many workers, particularly those who perform jobs that are more than unskilled labour, getting the most return can actually be done outside of a union. More importantly, though, we frown on collusion between corporations. When many companies band together and try to set prices higher than they would otherwise be, people get very angry, and moreover, such collusion tends to be banned by law. Nonetheless, people frequently accuse oil companies or gas stations or whatever of collusion. Plainly, society wants companies to compete openly, driving down the prices of their products, rather than colluding to set their prices and cooperatively reaping higher profits. Why is this so? Tell me, why do we not like corporations colluding to set prices? And yet, on the other hand, the same people who are first to accuse corporations of such practices tend to be the first to support unions. What are unions? Nothing more than workers colluding with each other to set the price of their labour higher than what it would otherwise be worth. Why is this acceptable when it comes to workers? Either price collusion is something economic entities should be allowed to do in order to further their own benefit, or it is something they should not be allowed to do in order to ensure efficient markets. Very strong and well-reasoned argument. Thank you for putting it into terms that even the bleeding heart corporation haters can surely understand. Edited June 19, 2011 by CPCFTW Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evening Star Posted June 19, 2011 Report Share Posted June 19, 2011 (edited) They are both entities made up of many people doing business with each other. Companies do business with each other. Companies and governments do business with each other. So do companies and unions. They aren't colluding to fix prices, they are bargaining to get the best price they can. By your logic, we should also ban co-ops or any other group of people who act together in order to get a better price on something. Yeah, I like the idea that each individual worker (and not an organized union) is the equivalent of an entire corporation. Edited June 19, 2011 by Evening Star Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Weber Posted June 20, 2011 Report Share Posted June 20, 2011 I didn't read it that way at all. I read it that he feels in some minds, productivity means more work for less pay. If anything, more productivity from an individual employee should mean more pay, not less. And sadly,it almost never does... Multicrafting is the word we use to describe this...If my workload is going to be doubled,should'nt my wages be comensurate with that extra work? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RNG Posted June 20, 2011 Report Share Posted June 20, 2011 And sadly,it almost never does... Multicrafting is the word we use to describe this...If my workload is going to be doubled,should'nt my wages be comensurate with that extra work? Serious question. What in your opinion is workload, or productivity? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Weber Posted June 20, 2011 Report Share Posted June 20, 2011 Serious question. What in your opinion is workload, or productivity? I can give you an example that I was faced with at a former workplace that was unionized... We built pressure vessels,boilers,package boilers etc. for the energy industry.We had/have (I'm still technically laid off from the place) seniority lists for welders and fitters.What the company proposed was that we essentially go to a master seniority list by combining the two trades into one...It should be noted that,while the two trades are symbiotic,there are different skills required for both...We were told that the company was going to make us a "generous offer" of an additional $1.25 an hour as a reward for those who went for this...In otherwords,being a welder,I was now going to be expected to double my workload by fitting what I was to weld for a whole $50 a week ($1.25 over 40 hours)...BEFORE TAXES!!! I don't think it's hard to imagine what the response was to the company's "generosity"...I will pick shit with the chickens before I'll work for less.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimG Posted June 20, 2011 Report Share Posted June 20, 2011 (edited) I don't think it's hard to imagine what the response was to the company's "generosity"...I will pick shit with the chickens before I'll work for less..Spoken like a completely clueless union hack who has no comprehension of the market realities. A little hint: welders in China work for a lot less than you and no amount of whining is going to change that. Edited June 20, 2011 by TimG Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted June 20, 2011 Report Share Posted June 20, 2011 Spoken like a completely clueless union hack who has no comprehension of the market realities. A little hint: welders in China work for a lot less than you and no amount of whining is going to change that. China also pegs its currency. You want to compare a free market to a rigged market and imply that nothing should be done about companies taking advantage of disparate economies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Weber Posted June 20, 2011 Report Share Posted June 20, 2011 Spoken like a completely clueless union hack who has no comprehension of the market realities. A little hint: welders in China work for a lot less than you and no amount of whining is going to change that. Great!!! Have you seen the workmanship that comes out of China with repect to skilled labour in heavy industry??? Buy hey...It's cheaper so who cares who gets killed,right? Global market forces/invisible hand...yada yada yada... And,yet another tacit admission that free market economics is all about the race to the bottom for the vast majority of us and redistributing that wealth out of the fading middle class and back upwards into the hands of the few... Great global society you Friedmanite/Von Hayakians want to build... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Weber Posted June 20, 2011 Report Share Posted June 20, 2011 China also pegs its currency. You want to compare a free market to a rigged market and imply that nothing should be done about companies taking advantage of disparate economies. That's part of the redistributive race to the bottom the free marketeers want... Pit low wage/low standard of living jurisdictions against high wage/high standard of living jurisdictions to force downward pressure on wage expectations... Yeah...Gotta love the freedom... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RNG Posted June 20, 2011 Report Share Posted June 20, 2011 I can give you an example that I was faced with at a former workplace that was unionized... We built pressure vessels,boilers,package boilers etc. for the energy industry.We had/have (I'm still technically laid off from the place) seniority lists for welders and fitters.What the company proposed was that we essentially go to a master seniority list by combining the two trades into one...It should be noted that,while the two trades are symbiotic,there are different skills required for both...We were told that the company was going to make us a "generous offer" of an additional $1.25 an hour as a reward for those who went for this...In otherwords,being a welder,I was now going to be expected to double my workload by fitting what I was to weld for a whole $50 a week ($1.25 over 40 hours)...BEFORE TAXES!!! I don't think it's hard to imagine what the response was to the company's "generosity"...I will pick shit with the chickens before I'll work for less.. If they were expecting you to double your workload, then you were really fucking them before. If you were performing so poorly that they could want you to improve by a factor of two, then you are a thief and a con-man. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonam Posted June 20, 2011 Report Share Posted June 20, 2011 (edited) If they were expecting you to double your workload, then you were really fucking them before. If you were performing so poorly that they could want you to improve by a factor of two, then you are a thief and a con-man. I'm not so sure. I'm sure you've seen roads being fixed/repaved by government workers. Ever notice how there's usually one guy doing something, and 2-5 others nearby just standing around chatting/watching? On average, each one of those guys probably does an hour or two of actual work throughout the day. I don't think it's unusual, rather, it's the norm, especially in unionized labour, but even in non-unionized "skilled" labour and even among professionals. Face it, anyone who sits in a cubical is spending most of their time doing anything but working. How many people on this forum post from work, for example? On the few days when people actually really need to get something done, they work at a frenzied pace and accomplish many many times as much as they do on normal days. If they worked like that every day, productivity would probably soar tenfold if not a hundredfold. I'm working for a startup with just 5 people right now, and holy crap do we get a lot of stuff done every day. We've gone from an idea on a whiteboard to a functioning prototype of a product in just a few months. In comparison, every job I've had before, I can admit I spent most of my time just sitting around doing nothing, as did most of my coworkers and colleagues. The worst example was when I worked for the Canadian Space Agency, and did absolutely nothing for an entire year, and neither did the entire department I was in. I really think productivity being only a tiny tiny fraction of what people are capable of is the norm. Edited June 20, 2011 by Bonam Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evening Star Posted June 20, 2011 Report Share Posted June 20, 2011 I really think productivity being only a tiny tiny fraction of what people are capable of is the norm. I actually tend to believe this as a general principle, even outside of the workplace. (Doesn't change my opinion of unions though...) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Weber Posted June 20, 2011 Report Share Posted June 20, 2011 If they were expecting you to double your workload, then you were really fucking them before. If you were performing so poorly that they could want you to improve by a factor of two, then you are a thief and a con-man. Walk a mile in my shoes before you start with that crap... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evening Star Posted June 20, 2011 Report Share Posted June 20, 2011 (edited) Yeah, to be clear, my comment just now was not a comment on your own work or productivity AT ALL, Jack. -- If anything, I was mainly just thinking about how much more I can get done on some days when I'm just more focused - whether it comes to work or reading or practising or working out or whatnot. Edited June 20, 2011 by Evening Star Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted June 20, 2011 Report Share Posted June 20, 2011 There's no question, I waste a great deal of time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimG Posted June 20, 2011 Report Share Posted June 20, 2011 (edited) China also pegs its currency. You want to compare a free market to a rigged market and imply that nothing should be done about companies taking advantage of disparate economies.I don't like the currency peg but we had do much about it as long as the US keeps running huge deficits. If the US could get its act in gear it wouldn't need China to buy its bonds. Unfortunately, the Dems and their union buddies are so addicted to their entitlements they rufuse to consider actually cutting spending. Edited June 20, 2011 by TimG Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.9a49e1b2f22a6d34a345152c50044aa9.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.