The business cannot pay what the job is actually worth. We would have to outsource every single industry because there is no way to compete against foreign markets if we did.

You assume way too much.

I am a CNA now, which seem to be extremely underpaid (especially understaffed), and i was in the Army Infantry, for about 6 years.

You just lack the understanding of how economics works. If you did, you would realize that the market determines the wages. If there is intervention, we have wasted money from everyone, because, that is what happens when you introduce inefficiency to a system.

Uh oh.... And why is that Andrew???

You say that I assume too much...yet you assume that I know nothing about economics just because I don't agree with you about the need to eradicate unions.

Careful what you assume, dude.

You are missing the point.

A livable wage is important, yes. Bottom line is that you and i have to pay for this livable wage. This means that even that union worker that gets this wage has to pay an extra $100 a week in food to pay for other union members benefits.

So, because have a livable wage is more important than a prosperous economy, this "livable wage" just increased. Thus, again, increasing the need for additional pay, which again raises cost of living.

Notice a pattern here?

Everything is connected. Everything is balanced by nature itself. However, when you interfere with that balance, there is a reaction, that causes a ripple-like affect.

lol... you're going to make me say it?

Otherwise there can be no profits. If a product has fixed raw material and input costs, everything else is essentially labor. If the market value of a widget is $10 and $4 of that is those fixed costs, your labor is worth $6. only now, there is no profit. if the price rises, your value of input rises and again, there is no profit. you simply have to be paid less than your worth or there would be no job. worth would work in an individualist, anarchist society but in a system like today, there is no viable way for it to happen.

the outsourcing to a nation with no such requirementt would be the only way to return a profit.

And the same sir, goes to you.

I will pay for the wage then. Because I will not support sweat shops.

Peace, dude.

Wasn't trying to assume anything about you.

Ya gotta give the little guy a chance in this country. If we still all lived on farms and raised our own food and made alot of our own stuff like clothes and stuff, the wage would not matter as much but most people do not live where they can do this and need that livable wage to afford housing and transportation, etc....

I will just have to pay more for my stuff so that I know the American workers are making that livable wage.

I am all for any legitimate attempt (call it union or private) to make sure people are receiving living wages. I agree that everything is balance but I also think most corporations are greedy and want as much profit as possible, not just enough to live off of. That causes an imbalance, because employees on the bottom rung will not get paid what they are truly worth or in need of while those at the top will continue to soak up all the additional profits.

The argument that higher wages causes the prices to be higher and only those making higher wages can afford it is true, but, it almost ignores the fact the prices go higher IRREGADLESS of the wages and when that happens with no increase in wages you dont have a consumer base that can afford the products anymore and it crashes,, much like housing.

And if enough are like you, the business will see its market share drop and change what it has to in order to get more business. That is how a true free market works. Everything is intertwined.

there is also market demand in the equation, the cost of inputs, and many other variable goods related to any product. the costs of cars go up and the UAW sees no more money. Well, that could be because the cost of steel went up. but the steel workers didn't get more money? Well maybe that's because those mining the iron and raw materials charged more. But they didn't see more money? well maybe it's because the cost of gas went up and they have to pay more to run their fleet vehicles.

EVERTHING is intertwined. any change in one market has a ripple effect on so many more.

I expected an answer like this from you.

You really put no thought into this view of our system did you?

Ever wonder why life has improved so much since the industrial revolution?

Have broken it down into it's purest form?

The answer is the production of capital. Capital is the car your drive yourself to work in, instead of a horse. Capital allows computers to save countless hours of calculations freeing up time from people to perform other tasks.

Capital provides efficiency, and helps increase quality of life.

Forget money, it is meaningless, and worthless without capital to purchase.

So, how, my dear, would the production of quality capital benefit from adding Unions to the workforce today? Today, when there are so many laws already protecting the worker. How would they not benefit the production of quality capital for the smallest price.

Without capital there is no wealth, all you have is paper, with numbers on it.

Now, when you produce capital efficiently, you have a senario in which everyone wins.

indeed

There will not be workers working under inhumane working conditions so all is good.

What happens when you become broke? Will you still be able to pay all your taxes AND purchase yet, even more expensive products?

aren't their laws and such for working conditions even without the unions????

Yup

Although i believe the unions are responsible for most of these laws.

There was a time we needed them, but as industrialization grows, we need them a little less.

Even if there is no business left, and/or all the workers are making minimum wage?