4 ms·

How about re-implementing unions in mass? When union membership rises, inequality declines [1]. [1] https://www.epi.org/news/union-membership-declines-inequali

How about re-implementing unions in mass? When union membership rises, inequality declines [1]. [1] https://www.epi.org/news/union-membership-declines-inequality-rises/ https://www.epi.org/news/union-membership-declines-inequalit...

v_lisivka 8y ago
But unions are also making business less efficient, so eventually it will be surpassed by an another business, so business will move to country with cheaper labor or will die.
- prolikewh0a 8y ago
  If the business is mainly run by the unionized workers, I don't think the workers would willingly move their own jobs out of the country.
  - chrisseaton 8y ago
    Why don't workers start their own worker-owned and unionised companies if they want to?
    - prolikewh0a 8y ago
      They do, but it's not as easy as you make it out to be. There are plenty of co-ops in this country, but they're typically local small chains.
      - chrisseaton 8y ago
        I think the problem is that powerful tech companies aren't started by committee of union stewards - it's down to a couple of motivated people with talent and a good idea.
        knuththetruth 8y ago
        And a huge dollop of VC money to make sure everything still stays within the network of existing Capital Owners, no matter how “disruptive” these businesses position themselves as
- nine_k 8y ago
  Not necessarily, if the business is a local monopoly, or if the use of unionized labor is enforced by law. The example of the former are dockers in many US ports (you usually can't easily build another port next to existing one), and of the latter, construction businesses in some US cities, like NYC.
- pmoriarty 8y ago
  The US is one of the world's largest and most lucrative markets. If these foreign companies want to do business with the US they could be required to allow unions and adopt labor protections at least as stringent as those in the US. Another thing that could be done is to tax companies that want to move their assets or businesses abroad. Do both of these and much of the incentive to move businesses abroad vanishes. In addition to that pressure, the largely pro-union and pro-labor EU could probably be easily enlisted to adopt a similar policy, thereby locking out offending companies both out of the US and EU markets. Further, take a look at what happened to the ultra-secretive Swiss banks, which for hundreds of years have held the privacy of their clients sacred, even against the prying eyes of the IRS. The US exerted its influence, and now there's a lot more transparency in even the formerly-secret Swiss banking system. Many of the recent revelations regarding the tax-evading super-rich and what assets they have hidden where have been a result of such increased transparency in the global banking system. US influence extends far, far past that. If the US decided to become pro-union and then hold the feet of other countries and companies to the fire were they to be anti-union or anti-labor, they could make a huge difference. It certainly won't happen in the current political climate, but it could be done.

v_lisivka 8y ago

But unions are also making business less efficient, so eventually it will be surpassed by an another business, so business will move to country with cheaper labor or will die.

prolikewh0a 8y ago
If the business is mainly run by the unionized workers, I don't think the workers would willingly move their own jobs out of the country.
- chrisseaton 8y ago
  Why don't workers start their own worker-owned and unionised companies if they want to?
  - prolikewh0a 8y ago
    They do, but it's not as easy as you make it out to be. There are plenty of co-ops in this country, but they're typically local small chains.
    - chrisseaton 8y ago
      I think the problem is that powerful tech companies aren't started by committee of union stewards - it's down to a couple of motivated people with talent and a good idea.
      - knuththetruth 8y ago
        And a huge dollop of VC money to make sure everything still stays within the network of existing Capital Owners, no matter how “disruptive” these businesses position themselves as
nine_k 8y ago
Not necessarily, if the business is a local monopoly, or if the use of unionized labor is enforced by law. The example of the former are dockers in many US ports (you usually can't easily build another port next to existing one), and of the latter, construction businesses in some US cities, like NYC.
pmoriarty 8y ago
The US is one of the world's largest and most lucrative markets. If these foreign companies want to do business with the US they could be required to allow unions and adopt labor protections at least as stringent as those in the US. Another thing that could be done is to tax companies that want to move their assets or businesses abroad. Do both of these and much of the incentive to move businesses abroad vanishes. In addition to that pressure, the largely pro-union and pro-labor EU could probably be easily enlisted to adopt a similar policy, thereby locking out offending companies both out of the US and EU markets. Further, take a look at what happened to the ultra-secretive Swiss banks, which for hundreds of years have held the privacy of their clients sacred, even against the prying eyes of the IRS. The US exerted its influence, and now there's a lot more transparency in even the formerly-secret Swiss banking system. Many of the recent revelations regarding the tax-evading super-rich and what assets they have hidden where have been a result of such increased transparency in the global banking system. US influence extends far, far past that. If the US decided to become pro-union and then hold the feet of other countries and companies to the fire were they to be anti-union or anti-labor, they could make a huge difference. It certainly won't happen in the current political climate, but it could be done.