|
Termyn8or -> RE: Post Columnist: Wages Are Too Low (7/20/2011 8:59:31 PM)
|
"One of those crazy Marxists who thinks that laborers have a right to the owner's profits even though they take no risk."
No risk ? Seems to me labor did take risks. Took jobs with the promise of advancement and opportunity, devoted themselves and paid high loyalty to the company.
However it is a physical fact that loyalty has no mass, it goes up but it doesn't come down. However sometimes it doesn't go up. Some unions have abused the power of collective bargaining, notably some public employee unions, some UAW and teamsters etc., but unions were initially formed to gain footing against exploitation.
Take Henry Ford, he paid unprecedented wages, and required very hard work for it. Many people couldn't hack it there. But those who could were rewarded. There was no need for a union back then. Well last I heard Ford Motor Co. was unionized. Why ? What changed ?
Did the taste of le dolche vita breed greed or did the company change ? My Father worked for a company before it was unionized, he said it was great. When the union came, things went downhill and he left. Not all unions benefit the members. The only thing I can think of that unions always benefit is unions, save a very few. Some have extensive training and apprenticeship programs and are truly worthwhile. But most have one thing in common, that ultimately the employer bears the educational costs in one way or another. But is that wrong ?
In our divisive culture, you decide whether you think that is wrong or right, and you do it based on your own best interests, not on the society as a whole. And that divisiveness in and of itself indicates that some think that to have one ounce of patriotism or loyalty to anyone is socialism or communism, or something of the sort.
Is it true or not ?
T^T
|
|
|
|
