6 ms·

>>Even in the "good old days", labor in the U.S. won a rather Pyrrhic victory in that organizing became shoehorned in a narrow legal framework with narrow goals

>>Even in the "good old days", labor in the U.S. won a rather Pyrrhic victory in that organizing became shoehorned in a narrow legal framework with narrow goals. It makes the decline of union power same rather inevitable. The union movement completely captured US industry and extracted exorbitant benefits that crippled the golden geese of the US economy. The only reason private sector unions declined in membership is that the industries they exploited saw their US-based operations contract, or disappear altogether. Meanwhile, the public sector unions have steadily grown in power, and steadily increased their control over public policy, by successfully pushing for successively more left-wing governments: https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/social-spending-oecd-longrun https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/social-spending-oecd-long... And the result has been detrimental to the efficiency of public spending, whether you look at education: https://academic.oup.com/qje/article-abstract/111/3/671/1839935 https://academic.oup.com/qje/article-abstract/111/3/671/1839... Or policing: https://academic.oup.com/jleo/advance-article/doi/10.1093/jleo/ewaa025/6054285 https://academic.oup.com/jleo/advance-article/doi/10.1093/jl... Or any other public sector.

blowski 5y ago
These comments highlight the need for balance between the two extremes. We are currently at one extreme, and need to find a way back to the middle.
- CryptoPunk 5y ago
  I appreciate you keeping an open mind. But I would also nitpick, and make the argument that the middle-ground between two widely divergent positions is not always right. I would argue we should never undermine the freedom to contract, which labor unions urge us to do when they advocate laws preventing employers from choosing to not associate with them. Their premise, that corporate power can sometimes be abusive, can have some validity, without their solution, which is limitations on the right to freely contract, being correct.
  - blowski 5y ago
    Do these people genuinely have freedom to contract? If there's only one employer in town (or a range of employers offering the same conditions), then that freedom is moot. This is the balance we need. There needs to be equal forces pushing up and down on workers' rights. At the moment, for many industries, there is too much down and not enough up. Could you make collective bargaining work without restricting freedom to contract in some way?
    - CryptoPunk 5y ago
      >>Do these people genuinely have freedom to contract? Yes, and if they didn't, a court, made up of a jury of their peers, would find the contract void, as contracts require informed/genuine consent. >>If there's only one employer in town (or a range of employers offering the same conditions), then that freedom is moot. Even in the late 19th century, workers in company towns had market options: https://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2015/01/in-defense-of-the-company-town.html https://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2015/01/in... And in any case, that situation is exceedingly rare, especially in the modern highly urbanized economy, where a large and growing percentage of the population lives in high population metropolises with thousands of employers. >>There needs to be equal forces pushing up and down on workers' rights. I disagree with this assessment, based on the empirical evidence, which shows wages consistently rise in lockstep with per capita GDP. What gives workers bargaining power is companies seeing their productivity and revenue rise, and as a consequence, bidding more for workers' services as they compete with other employers. That's the dynamic behind wages in China tripling over the last twenty years.
      - cloudfifty 5y ago
        workers' rights isn't the same thing as wage. People in western-Europe are happier than folk in the US, with more worker's rights and less wages.
        ChrisLomont 5y ago
        Western Europe countries (per CIA definitions) are Belgium, France, Ireland, Luxembourg, Monaco, Netherlands, and United Kingdom. Belgium and France rank below the US [2], Monaco is not listed, the other 4 are close to the US, except the Netherlands. Also, Monaco (population 38,000) has the highest number of millionaires and billionaires per capita in the world. They're not the usual workers and union type of country. I suppose you mean the Nordic countries are happier as a group, which is true, but World Happiness Reports explicitly do not list your reasons as the cause of Nordic happiness [1], instead listing other factors. Do you have a source showing their happiness is caused by the factors you listed? I can find none. All list things like lack of corruption, belief in government, etc., as the reasons for their happiness. [1] https://worldhappiness.report/ed/2020/the-nordic-exceptionalism-what-explains-why-the-nordic-countries-are-constantly-among-the-happiest-in-the-world/ https://worldhappiness.report/ed/2020/the-nordic-exceptional... [2] https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/happiest-countries-in-the-world https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/happiest-...
pydry 5y ago
>successively more left-wing governments Oh, so that's how wealth inequality skyrocketed? each government was more left wing than the previous when it dragged down taxes? >And the result has been detrimental to the efficiency of public spending, whether you look at education It's paywalled so it's hard to tell how they measured productivity but most measures of teacher productivity are hot garbage akin to measuring developer productivity by lines of code written. That's likely twice as true when a "finding" as politically useful as "unions bad for productivity" goes. The private sector hates public sector unionization. They have to compete with it and it makes unionization in their industry more likely.

blowski 5y ago

These comments highlight the need for balance between the two extremes. We are currently at one extreme, and need to find a way back to the middle.

CryptoPunk 5y ago
I appreciate you keeping an open mind. But I would also nitpick, and make the argument that the middle-ground between two widely divergent positions is not always right. I would argue we should never undermine the freedom to contract, which labor unions urge us to do when they advocate laws preventing employers from choosing to not associate with them. Their premise, that corporate power can sometimes be abusive, can have some validity, without their solution, which is limitations on the right to freely contract, being correct.
- blowski 5y ago
  Do these people genuinely have freedom to contract? If there's only one employer in town (or a range of employers offering the same conditions), then that freedom is moot. This is the balance we need. There needs to be equal forces pushing up and down on workers' rights. At the moment, for many industries, there is too much down and not enough up. Could you make collective bargaining work without restricting freedom to contract in some way?
  - CryptoPunk 5y ago
    >>Do these people genuinely have freedom to contract? Yes, and if they didn't, a court, made up of a jury of their peers, would find the contract void, as contracts require informed/genuine consent. >>If there's only one employer in town (or a range of employers offering the same conditions), then that freedom is moot. Even in the late 19th century, workers in company towns had market options: https://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2015/01/in-defense-of-the-company-town.html https://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2015/01/in... And in any case, that situation is exceedingly rare, especially in the modern highly urbanized economy, where a large and growing percentage of the population lives in high population metropolises with thousands of employers. >>There needs to be equal forces pushing up and down on workers' rights. I disagree with this assessment, based on the empirical evidence, which shows wages consistently rise in lockstep with per capita GDP. What gives workers bargaining power is companies seeing their productivity and revenue rise, and as a consequence, bidding more for workers' services as they compete with other employers. That's the dynamic behind wages in China tripling over the last twenty years.
    - cloudfifty 5y ago
      workers' rights isn't the same thing as wage. People in western-Europe are happier than folk in the US, with more worker's rights and less wages.
      - ChrisLomont 5y ago
        Western Europe countries (per CIA definitions) are Belgium, France, Ireland, Luxembourg, Monaco, Netherlands, and United Kingdom. Belgium and France rank below the US [2], Monaco is not listed, the other 4 are close to the US, except the Netherlands. Also, Monaco (population 38,000) has the highest number of millionaires and billionaires per capita in the world. They're not the usual workers and union type of country. I suppose you mean the Nordic countries are happier as a group, which is true, but World Happiness Reports explicitly do not list your reasons as the cause of Nordic happiness [1], instead listing other factors. Do you have a source showing their happiness is caused by the factors you listed? I can find none. All list things like lack of corruption, belief in government, etc., as the reasons for their happiness. [1] https://worldhappiness.report/ed/2020/the-nordic-exceptionalism-what-explains-why-the-nordic-countries-are-constantly-among-the-happiest-in-the-world/ https://worldhappiness.report/ed/2020/the-nordic-exceptional... [2] https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/happiest-countries-in-the-world https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/happiest-...

pydry 5y ago

>successively more left-wing governments Oh, so that's how wealth inequality skyrocketed? each government was more left wing than the previous when it dragged down taxes? >And the result has been detrimental to the efficiency of public spending, whether you look at education It's paywalled so it's hard to tell how they measured productivity but most measures of teacher productivity are hot garbage akin to measuring developer productivity by lines of code written. That's likely twice as true when a "finding" as politically useful as "unions bad for productivity" goes. The private sector hates public sector unionization. They have to compete with it and it makes unionization in their industry more likely.