Unions

[ItsTheSheppy]

Originally Posted by Quovatis

First off, my "unskilled" comment relates to the discussion about cleaning toilets and flipping burgers. I never said teachers are unskilled, nor do I know of any teacher that gets paid minimum wage.

Getting paid "more than they are worth" refers to being forced to pay them more than the market dictates by law, not something I pull out of the air (i.e. minimum wage laws). This again refers to unskilled jobs, not teaching.

I was a teacher, getting 25k a year, and I didn't bitch.

I can't think of any reason someone cleaning toilets and flipping burgers 'deserves' to pay the least amount our government will legally allow someone to be paid. That there even has to be a minimum wage is rather insulting, isn't it? "I'd pay you less, but I'd be arrested". How nice.

I'm still hazy on what "more than they're worth" means. Is there a cap to how much a data analyst can be paid? If so, can you enlighten me? I'd be interested to know if there is an illegally high amount of money I could be paid. Gives me some idea as to my limitations.

As for your own personal experience: good for you. You were making wages near poverty level and happy. That's fine. But you don't get to tell other people that it's good for them because it's good for you.

[Warborn]

Originally Posted by ItsTheSheppy

As for your own personal experience: good for you. You were making wages near poverty level and happy. That's fine. But you don't get to tell other people that it's good for them because it's good for you.

Maybe if more people like him didn't think for some reason it's admirable to get paid dog shit and be happy about it, people doing that job wouldn't be getting paid dogshit.

It's so funny how some people talk in the US. I saw , where someone from his show talked to people in Mississippi -- an apparently very poor but also very conservative state -- and there were guys missing teeth and living in a heap of garbage talking about how they don't want health care to be affordable and how good it was back in the day when nobody had anything and they were proud of it.

The quote at the end there really summed up this line of thinking: "We would rather go broke and die hungry than give up our moral beliefs. I'm going to stand up for what I believe in even if I go broke doing it."

How noble. Except that what he believes in is apparently the right for him to die hungry and go broke. Getting paid a living wage for your work and being able to rest easy knowing you won't go broke if you get hurt or sick isn't some kind of insidious Commu-Nazi Socialist Muslim ideology that requires you to say you love Allah and hate freedom. Only in America is what amounts to the basic expectations of citizens seen as a dastardly plot to destroy their moral belief in dying young and in pain because they're poor and can't afford health care.

[Malorn]

Meh.

[ItsTheSheppy]

I've said it before and I'll say it again here: the Republican party, and conservative movement in general, has to be commended for accomplishing what people in power have been trying to figure out for all of human history: how the rich can get the poor to support them.

And as it turns out, it's rather simple. First, play to their fears. Tell them that their fears, no matter how irrational or couched in ignorance, are real, and that they will fight tirelessly to protect them from those fears. "All we have to fear is fear itself"... ah, how far we've come.

Second, invent new ones. Make sure those fears are of the people who would help the poor and marginalized. Your opponents, essentially.

Third, support the economic policies of the rich to garner support and political power. Repeat as necessary.

The conservatives have always had the money, and liberals, the poor. Only at some point, through some incredibly crafty and, frankly, genius theater, the right managed to grab the poor too. Not by making them less poor. By keeping them poor, and scared of the bogeyman, and telling them only they have the anti-bogeyman ointment.

you have to applaud it, as you die a little inside.

[Malorn]

Meh.

[Warborn]

Republicans have only 12% less of the <$100,000 income than Democrats. Democrats don't have the poor vote in any major sense. If they did, they'd never lose an election, as quite a large portion of the population is poor. But as the poor, toothless Mississippians who live in filth said, they'll keep voting Republican even though it doesn't do anything to benefit them because by God they have morals and they stand for something and maybe one day, who knows, maybe voting Republican will do something for them. And who'll be laughing then?

There'll always be poor, stupid people who'll vote Republican no matter what because they've been sold some bullshit about how Democrats are girls and even if your political part doesn't give a fuck about doing anything for you, you're a *** if you complain. So if you acknowledge that there are problems with America and vote Democrat because you don't think "more money for rich people" sounds like a good party line, that means you're a lesbian.

Originally Posted by Malorn

Quoting or referencing Bill Mahar earns you an automatic douchebag stamp.

Ad hominem responses earn you an automatic douchebag stamp. I don't care what your opinion of Bill Maher is.

[Quovatis]

Originally Posted by ItsTheSheppy

I can't think of any reason someone cleaning toilets and flipping burgers 'deserves' to pay the least amount our government will legally allow someone to be paid.

Please stop putting words in my mouth. I never said that.

[HalfManHalfGod]

Have a look at some teachers salaries.

http://www.familytaxpayers.org/salary.php

Just type in a common name such as "smith"

They certainly are not making nothing.

Remember these people get boo-co vaca, health insurance, a pension at 55 with 60% pay until death plus SocSec. Remember they pay almost nothing into their pension, health insurance etc...they are funded by tax payer monies. Also once they've taught for 2 years they get tenure and can NEVER be fired.

Here's the best part, they get summers off! They are free to make additional income or loaf around and drink margaritas. Trust me, my friends are teachers, their tans are perfect.


My mother in is a high school guidance consular make 120k a year! I know that for a fact and its correctly reported here so these are actual salaries.


Edit: Bill Mahar is a douchebag

[Hamma]

Originally Posted by Warborn

You've been sold a lie here I'm afraid. Paying your teachers a decent wage isn't going to bankrupt the country. Somehow Canada (or at least Ontario, Alberta -- aka. Little Texas -- might be different) manages to sustain teachers which receive something like 2x the amount that US teachers make. And it isn't about "getting rich", it's about making the profession attractive to intelligent and capable people.

But, hey, I dunno, maybe it isn't important to try and draw the best people into professions like teacher or police officer. Maybe the people who struggled through crappy colleges and barely scraped by and can't get a job doing anything else are really the ones you want teaching your kids and keeping you safe.

You are assuming I think they shouldn't be paid well. I don't think that at all.. but I don't think the answers are a union raping the city govt for all they have and taking money from other important things like fixing roads and infrastructure.

The issue is mindset. The issue is that we don't pay these teachers what they deserve and shitty teachers slide by because of unions.

They should be paid a fair amount of money no question at all. But Unions aren't going to solve the issue it has to be a total change in how we operate.

[Figment]

Originally Posted by Malorn

Didn't they also create that communist political system in the first place when they created the Soviet Union?

No, they did not.

[Malorn]

Meh.

[Warborn]

Originally Posted by Malorn

Not a union as we know them today of course

So maybe linking unions to communism and the Soviet Union isn't a very honest thing to do in a thread discussing modern unions. Just a crazy thought about approaching a topic with a bit of integrity rather than weaseling in a reference to dastardly communism.

[Malorn]

Meh.

[Red Beard]

Not a union as we know them today of course, but the Bolsheviks were the vast majority workers and peasants, not merchants, soldiers, or aristocracy.

Still wanted a central bank though...hmmm!

[Warborn]

Originally Posted by Malorn

I also find it ridiculous that if I get moved to another office that's across the hall I can't move my own stuff because the corporate movers are unionized. Or people can't pick up a soda can off the floor because that's a union job.

Unions exist because employers almost always attempt to fuck their employees and exploit them for all they're worth. If there's a stipulation that you can't pick up litter yourself because it's a union job, the issue isn't that unions are jerks who love seeing litter and want you to call one of their guys to pick up a pop can, the issue is that unions have had to set such firm and absolute rules because otherwise employers will exploit or circumvent them whenever and however they can.

I don't deny that sometimes unions are annoying. Working in a hospital, nursing unions have some stuff that everyone else has to work around to an extent. And when I was working for the city as a paramedic, our union was the general city union so all negotiating was done with them, and as such we got paid really substandard wages compared to the rest of the province.

So, unions aren't perfect. But without them, jobs would once again become unsafe, wages minimal, and working schedules incredibly demanding. As I mentioned earlier, the only reason unions exist is because capitalism with a free hand is vicious and unsympathetic. If the price people pay to make sure their employer can't bleed them is a bit of silly stuff about litter or moving office supplies, so be it. It's a small price to pay.