Page 2 of 2 [ 19 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

zendell
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 Nov 2007
Age: 34
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,174
Location: Austin, TX

27 Feb 2008, 6:23 am

Fuzzy wrote:
alex wrote:
never thought i'd see someone arguing that the unions are the greedy ones... :roll:


Apparently so. There have been a few situations related to that here in Canada, and one court case for sure.

The one involved a small town that did a petition to have walmart come there. Walmart did, though the small businesses didnt want it and suffered. Most went out of business. The town thrived because of walmart though.

As you probably know, there is a push to unionize walmart. Well, the union organizers chose that little town to make a beach head. The people there, particularly the walmart staff would be greatly pressured to unionize.

Walmart, of course, said that if it happened they would close that store. It isn't unexpected that they would protect their interests. Not exactly nice of them.. but the union isnt exactly innocent either.

Neither side is overly concerned with the fate of that little town. The pressure the union organizers are putting on that town could be called greedy. They chose tactical advantage over the people that they wish to sign up for their union. If they do win(have won?) then the store will close and the town will die. The union wont stick around any longer than walmart. It isn't unexpected that they would protect their interests either.

From there, regardless of the outcome, the battle will be repeated in the next small town with a walmart.

Both sides are greedy.

http://www.canada.com/reginaleaderpost/ ... fb1fc98089 tells it better than I could.


Explain to me how Wal-Mart was being greedy by paying fair market wages and not giving into extortion by the union. If I owned the Wal-Mart, I would have closed the store too because I think it is immoral to give into union demands.

I think economics should be a required course in high school. Most people don't realize that companies don't determine the wages they pay their employees. Wal-Mart, like all other companies, are forced to pay wages determined by the free market based on supply and demand for each position. That's why almost every company pays more than the minimum wage. They are forced to pay fair wages or they won't have enough employees to run the business. The union came in and demanded higher than fair wages and Wal-Mart did the right thing by shutting down. A free capitalist market allows us to have a good economy. Unions harm the economy by interfering with the free market and everyone else suffers as a result.



pandabear
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Aug 2007
Age: 65
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,402

27 Feb 2008, 9:46 am

So, maybe it is the evil unions who are running up the cost of cellular telephone service in the USA? Non-unionized poor countries are thus able to have much cheaper cellular telephone service?

Maybe if Verizon would just send in some scabs and thugs to wreck their union, then we would have cheaper cellular telephone service.



Fuzzy
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Age: 52
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,223
Location: Alberta Canada

02 Mar 2008, 6:57 am

To me it seems that cell phones make better sense in the third world because of how billing works. With a land line, you need a certain amount of assurance about who holds the deed for the land where the service is provided, so that debt can be fairly collected. With cell phones, the debt can be paid in advance, thus protecting the provider.