Quote (Valhalls_Sun @ Oct 22 2014 09:35am)
using Overseas labor vs unionized U.S. labor makes a horrible example to compare fora state using union labor or non union labor for one the state is not manufacturing or selling anything. And the state is not a money making endeavour it is a service endeavour. The wages that Mr. walker would be paying his union workers would be going back into his state's economy which would revitalize a dying economy boosting sales tax, and increasing state revenues.
If the State budget runs low then trim the damn budget but don't bust the backs of the labor force.
That isn't the comparison. The comparison is between GM's domestic production to Toyota's domestic production. Toyota operates 6 assembly plants in the US.
Of course the state isn't a money making endeavor, all the more reason to not allow collective bargaining for state workers. In money making endeavors, both the laborers and the capitalists vie for slices of the pie, including efforts to grow the pie. In state endeavors, the unions directly elect the people that sit on the other side of the negotiating table for their contract discussions.
Going back to your Cat story, clearly the union got too greedy. Had they settled on lowered healthcare contributions, they would still be employed in their high paying jobs. You have to understand that healthcare expenditure growth vastly outstrips regular economic growth. Maintaining a super-Cadillac plan in perpetuity is not a realistic proposition.
This post was edited by Santara on Oct 22 2014 09:24am