3 ms·

I'd like to offer an alternate theory: A unionized elite dominates the economy. This bloc constitutes millions of unionized public sector workers who are in th

I'd like to offer an alternate theory: A unionized elite dominates the economy. This bloc constitutes millions of unionized public sector workers who are in the top 10% of income earners, and the writers of major establishment media organisations like the New York Times and the New Republic. I just googled David Sessions and NewsGuild, and it turns out he is/was a high-ranking member: http://www.nyguild.org/post/contract-approved http://www.nyguild.org/post/contract-approved Like all elite groups with legally enshrined privileges, this group has created a set of myths to justify its existence, and a scapegoat to blame for society's ills. This elite views the principle of a free market economy as the greatest threat to its privileges, and so it creates a conspiracy theory where any intellectual that promotes this principle is working for the interests of billionaires who are really calling the shots. This elite is afraid of the freedom the internet provides. It is already looking to shut down free market interaction in digital media, by promoting digital media unionization: https://newrepublic.com/article/122667/how-digital-media-unionization-can-and-cant-strengthen-labor https://newrepublic.com/article/122667/how-digital-media-uni...

thisrod 9y ago
> Like all elite groups with legally enshrined privileges, this group has created a set of myths to justify its existence, and a scapegoat to blame for society's ills. Suppose that you're right. Then why are these things more true of the relatively weak union movement in the US, and less true of the ones that governed the UK and Australia for half of the 20th Century?
TheCowboy 9y ago
This sounds more like you have a chip on your shoulder for the people you defined as elites than a legitimate argument. It sounds like you're doing what you accuse them of: creating a set of myths to justify this imagined scapegoat; creating a conspiracy theory to attempt to neutralize a perceived threat by the defined group. Do you have actual numbers to demonstrate this large group of people are heavily in the top 10% of income earners? Journalism isn't that lucrative. Public school teaching isn't that lucrative. Unions overall have shrunk and continue to do so. It sounds like a veiled communist/socialist conspiracy by journalists and public sector workers, yet this is a group that you claim is in the top 10% and is therefore thriving even though they exist in a capitalist system. That's confused (unless you think we're knee-deep in socialism). I'd argue this post doesn't belong here as it's so far outside any evidence-based perspective that it becomes pure partisan spin representing what sounds like an Ayn Randian inspired ideology. To throw you a bone, I'm not a fan of all the power public sector unions wield, and there could be some reforms, but this isn't the way to persuade people.
- Jabanga 9y ago
  Evidence that most federal employees are in the top 10% of income earners [1]. I haven't compiled comprehensive statistics on public servants as a whole, but in all of the jurisdictions I'm familiar with, a large percentage are in the top 10%. For instance, across Canadian provinces, annual compensation for a teacher with 10 years experience is well over the $80,000 mark, which is approximately the threshold for being in the top 10 percent in Canada. [2] And these are very secure jobs with very low possibility of ever being fired. That has value that is not captured in compensation statistics. The teachers in BC are so entitled now that they openly tell students they don't like a particular candidate, and every student I've talked to hates that candidate and their party. Yes I don't have statistics for this particular claim - it's just anecdotes, but for me personally, it's clear as rain that unionisation reduces accountability and creates an elitist mindset among the privileged few who work in the public sector. There's evidence that unionisation has been very harmful to the education system [3]. Being a unionized journalist for a big media company comes with a lot of perks and job security. That is a material benefit owing from the accepted political ideology, that claims unionisation serves the public interest. >It sounds like a veiled communist/socialist conspiracy by journalists and public sector workers I would say it is in their economic interest to advocate for political ideologies that legitimize a major role of government in the economy, and I am conjecturing that this leads to bias by unionized journalists against free market ideology. I think it's a fair comment to make. >I'd argue this post doesn't belong here as it's so far outside any evidence-based perspective that it becomes pure partisan spin representing what sounds like an Ayn Randian inspired ideology. Please note the journalist in question is alleging a vast billionaire conspiracy, with nothing but anecdotes as evidence, and impugning upon the character of any 'thought leader' supporting market-based economic principles, with nothing but conjecture to support his outlandish accusations. If that's allowed here, then certainly my comment should be as well. His position is not an evidence-based one, at all. It's also note worthy that you're bristling at the possibility that I'm accusing journalists of being socialists/communists while you yourself don't hesitate to throw terms like "Ayn Randian inspired ideology" to denigrate me. Can I say pro-union position is "Lenin inspired ideology", or would you call for my comment to be expunged from here if I did? [1] https://www.cato.org/blog/federal-government-pay-exceeds-most-industries https://www.cato.org/blog/federal-government-pay-exceeds-mos... [2] http://www12.statcan.gc.ca/nhs-enm/2011/as-sa/99-014-x/99-014-x2011003_2-eng.cfm http://www12.statcan.gc.ca/nhs-enm/2011/as-sa/99-014-x/99-01... [3] https://academic.oup.com/qje/article-abstract/111/3/671/1839935/How-Teachers-Unions-Affect-Education-Production https://academic.oup.com/qje/article-abstract/111/3/671/1839...

thisrod 9y ago

> Like all elite groups with legally enshrined privileges, this group has created a set of myths to justify its existence, and a scapegoat to blame for society's ills. Suppose that you're right. Then why are these things more true of the relatively weak union movement in the US, and less true of the ones that governed the UK and Australia for half of the 20th Century?

TheCowboy 9y ago

This sounds more like you have a chip on your shoulder for the people you defined as elites than a legitimate argument. It sounds like you're doing what you accuse them of: creating a set of myths to justify this imagined scapegoat; creating a conspiracy theory to attempt to neutralize a perceived threat by the defined group. Do you have actual numbers to demonstrate this large group of people are heavily in the top 10% of income earners? Journalism isn't that lucrative. Public school teaching isn't that lucrative. Unions overall have shrunk and continue to do so. It sounds like a veiled communist/socialist conspiracy by journalists and public sector workers, yet this is a group that you claim is in the top 10% and is therefore thriving even though they exist in a capitalist system. That's confused (unless you think we're knee-deep in socialism). I'd argue this post doesn't belong here as it's so far outside any evidence-based perspective that it becomes pure partisan spin representing what sounds like an Ayn Randian inspired ideology. To throw you a bone, I'm not a fan of all the power public sector unions wield, and there could be some reforms, but this isn't the way to persuade people.

Jabanga 9y ago
Evidence that most federal employees are in the top 10% of income earners [1]. I haven't compiled comprehensive statistics on public servants as a whole, but in all of the jurisdictions I'm familiar with, a large percentage are in the top 10%. For instance, across Canadian provinces, annual compensation for a teacher with 10 years experience is well over the $80,000 mark, which is approximately the threshold for being in the top 10 percent in Canada. [2] And these are very secure jobs with very low possibility of ever being fired. That has value that is not captured in compensation statistics. The teachers in BC are so entitled now that they openly tell students they don't like a particular candidate, and every student I've talked to hates that candidate and their party. Yes I don't have statistics for this particular claim - it's just anecdotes, but for me personally, it's clear as rain that unionisation reduces accountability and creates an elitist mindset among the privileged few who work in the public sector. There's evidence that unionisation has been very harmful to the education system [3]. Being a unionized journalist for a big media company comes with a lot of perks and job security. That is a material benefit owing from the accepted political ideology, that claims unionisation serves the public interest. >It sounds like a veiled communist/socialist conspiracy by journalists and public sector workers I would say it is in their economic interest to advocate for political ideologies that legitimize a major role of government in the economy, and I am conjecturing that this leads to bias by unionized journalists against free market ideology. I think it's a fair comment to make. >I'd argue this post doesn't belong here as it's so far outside any evidence-based perspective that it becomes pure partisan spin representing what sounds like an Ayn Randian inspired ideology. Please note the journalist in question is alleging a vast billionaire conspiracy, with nothing but anecdotes as evidence, and impugning upon the character of any 'thought leader' supporting market-based economic principles, with nothing but conjecture to support his outlandish accusations. If that's allowed here, then certainly my comment should be as well. His position is not an evidence-based one, at all. It's also note worthy that you're bristling at the possibility that I'm accusing journalists of being socialists/communists while you yourself don't hesitate to throw terms like "Ayn Randian inspired ideology" to denigrate me. Can I say pro-union position is "Lenin inspired ideology", or would you call for my comment to be expunged from here if I did? [1] https://www.cato.org/blog/federal-government-pay-exceeds-most-industries https://www.cato.org/blog/federal-government-pay-exceeds-mos... [2] http://www12.statcan.gc.ca/nhs-enm/2011/as-sa/99-014-x/99-014-x2011003_2-eng.cfm http://www12.statcan.gc.ca/nhs-enm/2011/as-sa/99-014-x/99-01... [3] https://academic.oup.com/qje/article-abstract/111/3/671/1839935/How-Teachers-Unions-Affect-Education-Production https://academic.oup.com/qje/article-abstract/111/3/671/1839...