4 ms·

There is nothing anti laissez-faire about unions. In a free society people should be allowed to organize however they want. As long as the government stays out

There is nothing anti laissez-faire about unions. In a free society people should be allowed to organize however they want. As long as the government stays out of such situations a union is as capitalist an idea as a corporation.

prodigal_erik 15y ago
Unions depend on threats of violence or specialized legal action (using privileges which are only available to them by law). In a laissez-faire society, employers would be able to do business with competing workers against the union's wishes, and the union would fail in its modern function as a rent-seeking labor cartel.
- tjmc 15y ago
  You're overlooking health and safety which is still a very legitimate concern. In laissez-faire societies, mine workers die like flies. China (quite ironically as an apparently worker loving state) takes such an attitude and thousands of coal miners die each year. In Australia, where far more coal is mined, there have been no deaths this year. I wouldn't claim it's just the union influence that makes the difference as there's much more automation here for one thing. But to discount it as a factor is naive.
  - prodigal_erik 15y ago
    I agree, I'm not really a fan of Libertopia (it requires far more faith in human nature than I have), just making the argument that in that environment we wouldn't see unions as we know them now.
- omouse 15y ago
  Unions depend on threats of violence or specialized legal action EMPLOYMENT depends on threats of poverty! If you don't work, you might fucking die. Unions depend on threats of strikes and other actions, but they don't depend on violence.
  - prodigal_erik 15y ago
    It's not employers' fault we require food. But there's a long appalling history of replacement workers who have been murdered in cold blood by union members solely to maintain their coercive monopoly on available employees for "their" jobs: http://www.mailonsunday.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1025783/Scab-driver-burned-lorry-European-protests-high-fuel-prices-turn-violent.html http://www.mailonsunday.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1025783... http://www.bbc.co.uk/wales/history/sites/themes/society/industry_coal06.shtml http://www.bbc.co.uk/wales/history/sites/themes/society/indu... http://www.nrtw.org/en/blog/richard-trumka-facts-09152609 http://www.nrtw.org/en/blog/richard-trumka-facts-09152609 Hell, the reason these mafia have been granted the privileges they have (e.g., it's illegal not to negotiate) is that otherwise they were more than willing to declare war on employers: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/carnegie/sfeature/mh_horror.html http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/carnegie/sfeature/mh_horror.htm... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Union_violence http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Union_violence

prodigal_erik 15y ago

Unions depend on threats of violence or specialized legal action (using privileges which are only available to them by law). In a laissez-faire society, employers would be able to do business with competing workers against the union's wishes, and the union would fail in its modern function as a rent-seeking labor cartel.

tjmc 15y ago
You're overlooking health and safety which is still a very legitimate concern. In laissez-faire societies, mine workers die like flies. China (quite ironically as an apparently worker loving state) takes such an attitude and thousands of coal miners die each year. In Australia, where far more coal is mined, there have been no deaths this year. I wouldn't claim it's just the union influence that makes the difference as there's much more automation here for one thing. But to discount it as a factor is naive.
- prodigal_erik 15y ago
  I agree, I'm not really a fan of Libertopia (it requires far more faith in human nature than I have), just making the argument that in that environment we wouldn't see unions as we know them now.
omouse 15y ago
Unions depend on threats of violence or specialized legal action EMPLOYMENT depends on threats of poverty! If you don't work, you might fucking die. Unions depend on threats of strikes and other actions, but they don't depend on violence.
- prodigal_erik 15y ago
  It's not employers' fault we require food. But there's a long appalling history of replacement workers who have been murdered in cold blood by union members solely to maintain their coercive monopoly on available employees for "their" jobs: http://www.mailonsunday.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1025783/Scab-driver-burned-lorry-European-protests-high-fuel-prices-turn-violent.html http://www.mailonsunday.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1025783... http://www.bbc.co.uk/wales/history/sites/themes/society/industry_coal06.shtml http://www.bbc.co.uk/wales/history/sites/themes/society/indu... http://www.nrtw.org/en/blog/richard-trumka-facts-09152609 http://www.nrtw.org/en/blog/richard-trumka-facts-09152609 Hell, the reason these mafia have been granted the privileges they have (e.g., it's illegal not to negotiate) is that otherwise they were more than willing to declare war on employers: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/carnegie/sfeature/mh_horror.html http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/carnegie/sfeature/mh_horror.htm... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Union_violence http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Union_violence