Replies

No, unions exist to allow workers to excersize their collective power to bargain for better wages, treatment, etc.

Sure they do. /sarc Unions don't set non-union wages and make up a minority of wage earners in America. So, since unions were not part of the discussion until now, I must assume you have their perspective out of whack and at least a mild bias against them coming into the argument.

Unions are a part of any discussion against Wal-Mart. Wal-Mart is nonunion, and this is behind many of the attacks on Wal-Mart. BTW, unions are some of the biggest Dem donors.

As for what is reasonable or unreasonable, that is determined by the market. If GM could not afford to pay the wages, they would not be paid - union or no union. Simple as that.

GM cannot afford the labor. GM is losing money like crazy and may go bankrupt. See, there are these things in the business world called "contracts." GM has a union "contract" that makes their employment with workers a non at-will situation and does not allow GM the flexibility to downsize when it needs to.

So, your beef isn't with unions, it is with supply and demand. And no real surprise there. The entire effort consisting of the use of foreign labor, illegal immigrant labor, And imported Visa based fraud labor has been one of trying to undermine supply and demand by undermining the local market with those sources. That seems to be why these big three attacks + free trade seem so loved by the ethically challenged in the GOP and Dim party and why America is screaming about it to deaf politicians. Ya'll don't like supply and demand and to cover for your own failings, you attack us and say we don't like Capitalism. You lie about us to hide your own shortcomings. Unfortunately for you, everyone sees through it.

Bullsh*t. You simply attack the source and show your own lack of comprehension of how the business world works. Using foreign labor to manufacture at a lower cost raises the standards of living throughout both countries. Free trade, in effect, makes the market larger, and therefore more efficient because the allocating of resources is better. Illegal immigration is a different issue from free trade.n Protectionism is dead. So what. BTW, America is screaming about illegal immigrations, not foreign products. Illegal immigration costs in numerous ways other than driving down the cost of labor. As far as "undermining the local market," there is no such thing. You are connecting that market to another market. Foreign labor is not loved, foreign goods might be. Illegal immigration and Visa fraud (one in the same, really) are loved by the Dems because these people, if allowed to become citizens through amnesty, will vote Dem reliably. The current GOP leadership is too stupid and is worried (without cause) about alienation of currect Hispanic citizens. Your crap about "not liking supply and demand" is a strawman. Reminds me of that song, goes something like "just your imagination . . ."

So, again, your opinion on what "sounds reasonable" by way of wages, is useless. The market decides it, not you. You aren't happy with the market and supply and demand and have opted toward breaking both using unpatriotic and subversive methods. And that may lead to war.

THE MARKET DID NOT DECIDE THAT GM SHOULD PAY PEOPLE NOT TO WORK. Do you know what the market wage for labor that produces nothing is? $0. You attempt at using patriotism and subversiveness show a lack of depth in your thinking. War? HAHA. I am perfectly happy with the market. Your accusation that I somehow "broke it" suggests that you are not happy with the market as it currently is. Protectionism only protects the inefficient.

Unions are not part of the discussion and haven't been. They get dragged in because businesses don't like unions by and large - and neither do elitist, ivory towere republicans. Unions have good and bad effects. That is due to the people involved, not the concept. So spare us. You have a bias and don't like supply and demand when it brings about something you don't like. Simple. GM doesn't pay people not to work. GM Contracts with people for work and they have a provision for layoffs and downtime as a protection for the worker. If you don't like that, too bad. That is what the market decided - unmolested by your tinkering.

Collective bargaining is part of the market dynamic. GM and the employees agreed on employee compensation and benefits.
That is a market dynamic. You can handwring; but, if you want to claim it isn't, then no contract agreed to by anyone is "fair" even if they both agreed to it. Doesn't quite pass the sniff test..

You don't like supply and demand and to cover for that, your side invokes the strawman that the majority doesn't like capitalism. That's why they stopped polling on the issue. When the numbers approached 70%, they refused to do anything about it and just decided to be silent rather than debate the issue publically (offshoring/freetrade) and present the image of obstinance that would have been and now has been generated. Just as with Illegal immigration, the people spoke to the servants and the servants said "up yours". People aren't buying the bs lines and you guys are increasingly agitated over that fact.. Get used to it. It's gonna get a lot hotter while the frog changes place with the politicians.