4 ms·

It's funny, i find anti-union to be nearly identical to anti-government. It seems there are people who feel any organized entity with power is bad. Be it gover

It's funny, i find anti-union to be nearly identical to anti-government. It seems there are people who feel any organized entity with power is bad. Be it government, or union - the effect is the same. I can definitely agree that it can be bad, but to me it's the only entity that should be representing me. Corporations will have no incentive aligned with myself. Unions/Governments serve as a way to organize the people at large. Which to me is a wholly good thing. This organization however does not come without risks. I think where we fail as a civilization is recognizing this power dynamic and finding ways to monitor corruption. I want to give a government power, but i also need ways to monitor them. Without know if/when an organization becomes corrupted we have no way of healing, and it will always be doomed to fail in the worst way. I'm very pro-union. However we need to figure out monitoring. In Governments, and Unions. Otherwise in my view it's just a matter of time before they fail.

badRNG 5y ago
> Be it government, or union - the effect is the same. I agree with your desire for oversight and accountability for either, but there is a difference of at least institutional momentum. I don't think anyone would consider institutional momentum of the US government to be aligned with the interests of workers. I think unions have an opportunity to be better and more explicitly aligned with those interests. As an employee previously part of a union, the adversarial relationship between unions and businesses seems to, at the end, strike a balance between the competing interests of the workers and the business. A business without unions can be like a courtroom without public defenders: not a great place to be the little guy.
tablespoon 5y ago
> It seems there are people who feel any organized entity with power is bad. Be it government, or union - the effect is the same. I don't think that's true. Those people are typically very comfortable with one "organized entity with power" that you're leaving out: private capital in its various forms. What they're doing is actually defending that against any challenges to its power. Usually those people are laborers like the rest of us, but they've been indoctrinated to identify with interests other than their own (often reinforced by having a slightly higher status than most other laborers, or by unlikely-to-be-met aspirations of hitting the jackpot and becoming a wealthy capitalist themselves).
- adwn 5y ago
  > one "organized entity with power" that you're leaving out: private capital in its various forms Private capital is not "one organized entity", especially not in "its various forms".
  - tablespoon 5y ago
    > Private capital is not "one organized entity", especially not in "its various forms". In most cases it's at least as organized as unions. Also, a decentralized entity is still an entity. But my point stands, there are very, very few people who actually feel "any organized entity with power is bad." If it seems that way, something's being left out of the analysis.
    - DiggyJohnson 5y ago
      Can you explain how "private capital" is "at least as organized as unions"? I don't mean to be snarky, but that seems axiomatically untrue.
      - notJim 5y ago
        I'm a different person than you're replying to, but just to give some examples of how capital organizes itself, there are a ton of organizations they use to represent their interests. For example, at every level of government, there is a chamber of commerce formed by major businesses or their owners. That chamber of commerce publishes opinions, lobbies politicians, etc. There are also all kinds of think tanks funded and often founded by businesspeople to promote their interests. The Heritage Foundation is a prominent example. In the US, these groups have enormous influence at every level.

badRNG 5y ago

> Be it government, or union - the effect is the same. I agree with your desire for oversight and accountability for either, but there is a difference of at least institutional momentum. I don't think anyone would consider institutional momentum of the US government to be aligned with the interests of workers. I think unions have an opportunity to be better and more explicitly aligned with those interests. As an employee previously part of a union, the adversarial relationship between unions and businesses seems to, at the end, strike a balance between the competing interests of the workers and the business. A business without unions can be like a courtroom without public defenders: not a great place to be the little guy.

tablespoon 5y ago

> It seems there are people who feel any organized entity with power is bad. Be it government, or union - the effect is the same. I don't think that's true. Those people are typically very comfortable with one "organized entity with power" that you're leaving out: private capital in its various forms. What they're doing is actually defending that against any challenges to its power. Usually those people are laborers like the rest of us, but they've been indoctrinated to identify with interests other than their own (often reinforced by having a slightly higher status than most other laborers, or by unlikely-to-be-met aspirations of hitting the jackpot and becoming a wealthy capitalist themselves).

adwn 5y ago
> one "organized entity with power" that you're leaving out: private capital in its various forms Private capital is not "one organized entity", especially not in "its various forms".
- tablespoon 5y ago
  > Private capital is not "one organized entity", especially not in "its various forms". In most cases it's at least as organized as unions. Also, a decentralized entity is still an entity. But my point stands, there are very, very few people who actually feel "any organized entity with power is bad." If it seems that way, something's being left out of the analysis.
  - DiggyJohnson 5y ago
    Can you explain how "private capital" is "at least as organized as unions"? I don't mean to be snarky, but that seems axiomatically untrue.
    - notJim 5y ago
      I'm a different person than you're replying to, but just to give some examples of how capital organizes itself, there are a ton of organizations they use to represent their interests. For example, at every level of government, there is a chamber of commerce formed by major businesses or their owners. That chamber of commerce publishes opinions, lobbies politicians, etc. There are also all kinds of think tanks funded and often founded by businesspeople to promote their interests. The Heritage Foundation is a prominent example. In the US, these groups have enormous influence at every level.