5 ms·

It's union politics which gets their legislation passed. No one would support price-raising taxi cartels if the question weren't coated with rhetoric about wage

by uvdiv 14y ago

It's union politics which gets their legislation passed. No one would support price-raising taxi cartels if the question weren't coated with rhetoric about wages and welfare. Let a taxi union explain it: http://www.nytwa.org/campaigns/stopillegalpickups http://www.nytwa.org/campaigns/stopillegalpickups

adestefan 14y ago
We support price raising corporate cartels for electricity, natural gas, cell service, cable, water, and in most cases mass transit. There are already places that have banned internet delivery coops and places have tried to outlaw selling solar energy back to the grid.
- CamperBob2 14y ago
  We support price raising corporate cartels for electricity, natural gas, cell service, cable, water, and in most cases mass transit. Most of those are natural monopolies that require some degree of regulation for equitable service. Livery service is not a natural monopoly. There are already places that have banned internet delivery coops and places have tried to outlaw selling solar energy back to the grid. What does that have to do with the price of bread in Peoria?
  - fleitz 14y ago
    There's a lot of data pointing to the idea that even 'natural monopolies' benefit from competition. IIRC, Lubbock Texas has two hydro companies and Lubbock and other residents of two hydro company towns enjoy on average 20% lower rates.
- uvdiv 14y ago
  Buying solar power from residential users is usually a loss to the utility (hence other ratepayers). Especially when they want to sell at retail electricity rates rather than wholesale -- which is what net metering essentially does. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/05/business/solar-payments-set-off-a-fairness-debate.html?pagewanted=all http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/05/business/solar-payments-se...
mathgladiator 14y ago
Wow, that page ... was creepy. Gauh, does this mean I'm a libertarian?
taligent 14y ago
Right. Because corporations can't lobby to get legislation passed. I will never understand people that bash unions. They serve an important counterweight in society.
- fleitz 14y ago
  Certainly employees should be able to freely associate into unions, however like many groups unions have both positive and negative results. Some people feel that the positives outweigh the negatives and some feel the negatives outweigh the positives. I feel that unions have historically been very positive. In more recent years I think they've hindered progress for example in Vancouver up until the 80s it was required that every container was unloaded and reloaded simply to ensure jobs rather than letting consumers enjoy the efficiencies created by gantry cranes and containerized shipping. Like anyone else unions use their power for both good and bad. From the perspective of their members I can understand how reloading containers would be a good thing, but from the perspective of anyone who bought goods that were shipped through the port of Vancouver I would see it as wasteful. I see nothing wrong with bashing unions for the things they do which are destructive to society at large. I'm not sure what I'd think of a person who thought that unions had never done anything bad.
  - pgeorgi 14y ago
    "for example in Vancouver up until the 80s it was required that every container was unloaded and reloaded simply to ensure jobs rather than letting consumers enjoy the efficiencies created by gantry cranes and containerized shipping" ... Where one other option would have been to accept the new tech in exchange for paying for education of those who have a useless job due to new technology - ie. employer gives up some of the monetary efficiency benefits for a limited number of years to reduce/reorganize the workforce responsibly. But I guess that would mean the end of the union and its personnel overhead, and the union would have to use its power for such an agreement instead of that unload/reload stunt. I just can't imagine being satisfied with a job that I know is utterly useless and just kept around to keep me working.
ktizo 14y ago
I'll completely accept that some specific unions, almost always in concert with bits of government, get captured by organised crime in some places and then the market is then manipulated to serve neither the members of the union, or people represented by the government. This depends completely on the union and the government we are discussing however. I would also accept that this may be partly the case in this instance, given the behaviour. [edit] Though I find it less likely after having read eli's brief comment on the matter. That does not mean that unionism itself is the problem, but rather the culture of certain unions. In the same way that just because certain companies act badly doesn't mean that all do.
eli 14y ago
Here's the thing: DC taxi drivers aren't unionized.

by uvdiv 14y ago

adestefan 14y ago

We support price raising corporate cartels for electricity, natural gas, cell service, cable, water, and in most cases mass transit. There are already places that have banned internet delivery coops and places have tried to outlaw selling solar energy back to the grid.

CamperBob2 14y ago
We support price raising corporate cartels for electricity, natural gas, cell service, cable, water, and in most cases mass transit. Most of those are natural monopolies that require some degree of regulation for equitable service. Livery service is not a natural monopoly. There are already places that have banned internet delivery coops and places have tried to outlaw selling solar energy back to the grid. What does that have to do with the price of bread in Peoria?
- fleitz 14y ago
  There's a lot of data pointing to the idea that even 'natural monopolies' benefit from competition. IIRC, Lubbock Texas has two hydro companies and Lubbock and other residents of two hydro company towns enjoy on average 20% lower rates.
uvdiv 14y ago
Buying solar power from residential users is usually a loss to the utility (hence other ratepayers). Especially when they want to sell at retail electricity rates rather than wholesale -- which is what net metering essentially does. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/05/business/solar-payments-set-off-a-fairness-debate.html?pagewanted=all http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/05/business/solar-payments-se...

mathgladiator 14y ago

Wow, that page ... was creepy. Gauh, does this mean I'm a libertarian?

taligent 14y ago

Right. Because corporations can't lobby to get legislation passed. I will never understand people that bash unions. They serve an important counterweight in society.

fleitz 14y ago
Certainly employees should be able to freely associate into unions, however like many groups unions have both positive and negative results. Some people feel that the positives outweigh the negatives and some feel the negatives outweigh the positives. I feel that unions have historically been very positive. In more recent years I think they've hindered progress for example in Vancouver up until the 80s it was required that every container was unloaded and reloaded simply to ensure jobs rather than letting consumers enjoy the efficiencies created by gantry cranes and containerized shipping. Like anyone else unions use their power for both good and bad. From the perspective of their members I can understand how reloading containers would be a good thing, but from the perspective of anyone who bought goods that were shipped through the port of Vancouver I would see it as wasteful. I see nothing wrong with bashing unions for the things they do which are destructive to society at large. I'm not sure what I'd think of a person who thought that unions had never done anything bad.
- pgeorgi 14y ago
  "for example in Vancouver up until the 80s it was required that every container was unloaded and reloaded simply to ensure jobs rather than letting consumers enjoy the efficiencies created by gantry cranes and containerized shipping" ... Where one other option would have been to accept the new tech in exchange for paying for education of those who have a useless job due to new technology - ie. employer gives up some of the monetary efficiency benefits for a limited number of years to reduce/reorganize the workforce responsibly. But I guess that would mean the end of the union and its personnel overhead, and the union would have to use its power for such an agreement instead of that unload/reload stunt. I just can't imagine being satisfied with a job that I know is utterly useless and just kept around to keep me working.

ktizo 14y ago

I'll completely accept that some specific unions, almost always in concert with bits of government, get captured by organised crime in some places and then the market is then manipulated to serve neither the members of the union, or people represented by the government. This depends completely on the union and the government we are discussing however. I would also accept that this may be partly the case in this instance, given the behaviour. [edit] Though I find it less likely after having read eli's brief comment on the matter. That does not mean that unionism itself is the problem, but rather the culture of certain unions. In the same way that just because certain companies act badly doesn't mean that all do.

eli 14y ago

Here's the thing: DC taxi drivers aren't unionized.