Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 06-20-2013, 06:20 AM
 
Location: Earth
4,505 posts, read 6,457,002 times
Reputation: 4962

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by StillwaterTownie View Post
I bet your UPS man would strongly object to that notion.

UPS has abysmal working conditions! I only worked there for a month back in the late eighties.....worst place I've ever been. UPS treats its workers poorly.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-20-2013, 06:25 AM
 
Location: Columbus, OH
3,038 posts, read 2,504,956 times
Reputation: 831
Quote:
Originally Posted by StillwaterTownie View Post
Just to what depths do you have to go to get your anti-union propaganda?
lols.

You just make some crap up and say that everyone would be making less money if it weren't for unions.

I post data from the United States Census proving wages went up considerably faster and higher before unions were of any significance.

You say I am a propagandist. That's rich. lols.

Just like I said union people ignore facts that prove they are wrong. Predictable.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-20-2013, 06:34 AM
 
Location: Columbus, OH
3,038 posts, read 2,504,956 times
Reputation: 831
Quote:
Originally Posted by StillwaterTownie View Post
My God, how many times do you have to be told that it's a fact that unions don't operate for free? A billion times!! If you don't want to belong to a unionized workplace and enjoy its services, then stay the hell out of it. Other people would like to join a unionized work force if they could find one. A person wanting to accept the advantages of a unionized workplace free of charge is without the slightest doubt a freeloader, whether you are able to accept it as true, or not. Since you have never been a union member before, I can better understand where your ignorance about unions come from now.
I know unions don't work for free. I'm not sure what that has to do with anything. The local Lion's Club doesn't operate for free. They don't force non-members to pay dues.

And unions do not represent non-members. If they did, they would not have a problem with strike-busters. Strike-busters are non-union workers. Yet, unions do everything they can to deny them labor. This proves they unions are not for workers. They are for workers.

You can't justify unions forcing non-members to pay dues. You say unions don't operate for free? So what? Let union members support their own union.

You say non-members can work somewhere else? What happened to freedom of choice? If I wanna work somewhere and an employer wants to hire me then why should I be forced to pay extortion to a union I don't belong to??? My contract is a private affair between me and my employer. What business is it of the unions? If the union was for workers they would not care. I'm a worker. Instead they will deny me employment if I don't agree to their terms. No wonder the mafia is so involved in the unions. Getting something for nothing.

A group that forces non members to pay it dues every month are without the slightest doubt freeloaders.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-20-2013, 07:08 AM
 
Location: Columbus, OH
3,038 posts, read 2,504,956 times
Reputation: 831
Pro-union people can never answer simple questions.

Like why did wages rise faster and higher before unions in the United States?

Why do migration patterns show people consistently move from heavily unionized areas to non-unionized areas? (Except for Detroit for a decade or two). If unions helped workers migration would be the exact opposite as people overwhemingly move for economic opportunity.

Why was non-farm child labor virtually a thing of the past in the United States a couple decades before the feds and unions got around to outlawing it, yet unions lie and take credit for eliminating it?

Why was the average work week just slightly above 40 when unions came in and "saved' us from 90 hour weeks? lols. Why should we believe anything unions say when U.S. Census data proves they are lying? lols. It aint even that hard to verify that capitalism took care of all the problem unions want credit for decades before.

Why should a non-union member have to pay dues to a group he doesn't belong to? A worker wants to work and employer wants to hire him. It is a private contract. The worker did ask to union to represent him or enter into a contract with the union. How can you justify compelling non-members to pay a group they do not belong to? Sounds like protection money to me.

If unions were pro-worker why do they attempt to deny labor to an employer and work to a worker? If a union goes on strike unions do everything they can to stop strike-busters? All the strike-buster wants to do to is put some food on the table. What is wrong with that? The fact that unions stop strike-busters proves some things beyond a shadow of a doubt. Unions are not for workers as strike-busters are only trying to work. If unions were for workers they would have no problem with strike-busters. Unions are only for union members. They could care less about non-union members and will often resort to violence against them, unless it is time to extort union dues from non-union members, then they are all right. lols.

Instead of just answering these question I get excuses and rationalizations and nonsense. And unions have a way of ignoring any data that makes them look bad.

Here's the typical union dopey response:

Enjoy your weekend. lols.

Unions cost money to operate? So it's like everything else? So what?

Work someplace else? Again, proving a union will deny labor to a worker if the worker is not a member. If they cared about a workers interest why should they deny work to a worker? What gives a third party the right to decide where I can work? I don't tell union members where they are allowed to work, why should they decide that for me. I don't need some union that I don't belong to deciding for me. Height of arrogance.

That's propaganda? Citing data from the U.S. Census Bureau is propaganda? lols.

You're jealous of union members because they make more money? Some do, some don't. Some non-union members make more than me, some don't. Jealous? lols.

You're a freeloader? lols. I'm not a member of a union, never have been, more than likely never will be. Yet supposedly I'm a freeloader because I don't wanna give a group I don't belong to and derive no benefit from my money? LMFAO. Freeloaders want something for nothing. Unions want me to pay them when I'm not a member. I refuse to pay and I'm a freeloader? LOLs.

Union members cannot answer what should be simple to answer questions so they ignore data proving them wrong. It doesn't exist. They lie about what unions have done for their members and especially for non-members. They call people that don't see the relevance of union names. Anything to distract and not answer the question.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-20-2013, 08:53 AM
 
Location: Central Texas
13,715 posts, read 31,016,095 times
Reputation: 9270
Quote:
Originally Posted by Camlon View Post
I must say this is one of the dumbest posts I have read in a very long time.

No, wealth is not the best indicator for living standards. Supposedly according to your index you are three times better off in Italy than in Germany. Also I find it interesting how some countries vanished from the list. Qatar, Kuwait, UAE, Cyprus is included, but Portugal, Poland, and Greece isn't. In fact I can't even find Denmark. Still you ate this "study" raw.

Now let's be honest. You were actually looking for something better, such as incomes. But since incomes all show US to be in the top, then you couldn't use that. Hence, you noticed wealth. As it fitted your interest, it became the factor for living standards.

I think we rather should look at income.

This is average disposable income adjusted for costs
1 United States 42,050
2 Ireland 41,170
3 Luxembourg 37,997
4 Switzerland 35,471
5 Australia 34,952
6 United Kingdom 33,513
7 Canada 32,662
8 Norway 32,620
9 South Korea 31,051
10 Netherlands 29,269
11 Austria 29,008
12 Sweden 28,301
13 Denmark 27,974
14 Japan 27,763
15 France 27,452
16 Spain 26,856
17 Finland 25,747
18 Belgium 25,642
19 Israel 24,225
20 Germany 24,174
21 Italy 23,194
22 Greece 21,352
23 Portugal 17,170
24 Czech Republic 15,115
25 Slovakia 14,701
26 Poland 14,390
27 Estonia 13,737
28 Hungary 12,843

List of countries by average wage - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Fine post. Ellemint comes up with some interesting, but usually irrelevant metrics.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-20-2013, 09:01 AM
 
Location: Central Texas
13,715 posts, read 31,016,095 times
Reputation: 9270
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grim Reader View Post
Disposable income adjusted only for cost isn't a good measure either. It assumes that your neccessary expenses are the same from country to country.

When you look at the disposable incomes of countries like Norway and Luxembourg, stuff like healthcare, tuition fees, and so on, are already covered, and the disposable income is what you got left. That kindof works if you are comparing Luxembourg to Norway, but not so much with the US, which is exceptional in leaving a lot of those things to come out of peoples disposable income.

In exchange the US gets slightly lower taxes, which boosts the disposable income.

Everyone in the US doesn't have to cover every social benefit out-of-pocked, but enough do.
It is nearly useless to compare life in Luxembourg and Norway to the US. Neither of those two countries are diverse, and are immensely "rich" per capita. The US could take all the money from its billionaires and it would produce a short-lived drop in the national debt, or worse, a burst in government spending. Luxembourg is about the size of Kansas City and is either the 1st or 2nd richest country in the world (GDP per capita). Norway has vast natural resources (oil) to pay for the rich social services of its 5M people.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-20-2013, 11:18 AM
 
Location: Stillwater, Oklahoma
30,976 posts, read 21,494,168 times
Reputation: 9675
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyborgt800 View Post
UPS has abysmal working conditions! I only worked there for a month back in the late eighties.....worst place I've ever been. UPS treats its workers poorly.
That's quite an out of date opinion, especially since UPS workers went on strike since the late 1980s.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-20-2013, 11:27 AM
 
Location: Stillwater, Oklahoma
30,976 posts, read 21,494,168 times
Reputation: 9675
Quote:
Originally Posted by OhioRules View Post
I know unions don't work for free. I'm not sure what that has to do with anything. The local Lion's Club doesn't operate for free. They don't force non-members to pay dues.

And unions do not represent non-members. If they did, they would not have a problem with strike-busters. Strike-busters are non-union workers. Yet, unions do everything they can to deny them labor. This proves they unions are not for workers. They are for workers.

You can't justify unions forcing non-members to pay dues. You say unions don't operate for free? So what? Let union members support their own union.

You say non-members can work somewhere else? What happened to freedom of choice? If I wanna work somewhere and an employer wants to hire me then why should I be forced to pay extortion to a union I don't belong to??? My contract is a private affair between me and my employer. What business is it of the unions? If the union was for workers they would not care. I'm a worker. Instead they will deny me employment if I don't agree to their terms. No wonder the mafia is so involved in the unions. Getting something for nothing.

A group that forces non members to pay it dues every month are without the slightest doubt freeloaders.
Such utterly absurd statements in the above. For starters bringing up the Lion's Club is a vast fail. They don't hand you out paychecks when you go to their meetings. Some non-unionized employees can may make you work under terms you can't agree with, such as working on weekends, Sundays, or show up for work at 2 am. Still you don't have to work at such places, if you don't want to.

It would help, if you looked up the meaning of the word union. If you don't want to be in one, keep staying the hell out of one.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-20-2013, 11:31 AM
 
Location: Stillwater, Oklahoma
30,976 posts, read 21,494,168 times
Reputation: 9675
Quote:
Originally Posted by OhioRules View Post
lols.

You just make some crap up and say that everyone would be making less money if it weren't for unions.

I post data from the United States Census proving wages went up considerably faster and higher before unions were of any significance.

You say I am a propagandist. That's rich. lols.

Just like I said union people ignore facts that prove they are wrong. Predictable.
Sorry, a lot of other factors made the economic world go around and slowed wage growth than just the rise of unions from the past. Don't confuse cause with correlation.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-20-2013, 11:55 AM
 
Location: Stillwater, Oklahoma
30,976 posts, read 21,494,168 times
Reputation: 9675
Quote:
Originally Posted by OhioRules View Post
Pro-union people can never answer simple questions.

Like why did wages rise faster and higher before unions in the United States?

Why do migration patterns show people consistently move from heavily unionized areas to non-unionized areas? (Except for Detroit for a decade or two). If unions helped workers migration would be the exact opposite as people overwhemingly move for economic opportunity.

Why was non-farm child labor virtually a thing of the past in the United States a couple decades before the feds and unions got around to outlawing it, yet unions lie and take credit for eliminating it?

Why was the average work week just slightly above 40 when unions came in and "saved' us from 90 hour weeks? lols. Why should we believe anything unions say when U.S. Census data proves they are lying? lols. It aint even that hard to verify that capitalism took care of all the problem unions want credit for decades before.

Why should a non-union member have to pay dues to a group he doesn't belong to? A worker wants to work and employer wants to hire him. It is a private contract. The worker did ask to union to represent him or enter into a contract with the union. How can you justify compelling non-members to pay a group they do not belong to? Sounds like protection money to me.

If unions were pro-worker why do they attempt to deny labor to an employer and work to a worker? If a union goes on strike unions do everything they can to stop strike-busters? All the strike-buster wants to do to is put some food on the table. What is wrong with that? The fact that unions stop strike-busters proves some things beyond a shadow of a doubt. Unions are not for workers as strike-busters are only trying to work. If unions were for workers they would have no problem with strike-busters. Unions are only for union members. They could care less about non-union members and will often resort to violence against them, unless it is time to extort union dues from non-union members, then they are all right. lols.

Instead of just answering these question I get excuses and rationalizations and nonsense. And unions have a way of ignoring any data that makes them look bad.

Here's the typical union dopey response:

Enjoy your weekend. lols.

Unions cost money to operate? So it's like everything else? So what?

Work someplace else? Again, proving a union will deny labor to a worker if the worker is not a member. If they cared about a workers interest why should they deny work to a worker? What gives a third party the right to decide where I can work? I don't tell union members where they are allowed to work, why should they decide that for me. I don't need some union that I don't belong to deciding for me. Height of arrogance.

That's propaganda? Citing data from the U.S. Census Bureau is propaganda? lols.

You're jealous of union members because they make more money? Some do, some don't. Some non-union members make more than me, some don't. Jealous? lols.

You're a freeloader? lols. I'm not a member of a union, never have been, more than likely never will be. Yet supposedly I'm a freeloader because I don't wanna give a group I don't belong to and derive no benefit from my money? LMFAO. Freeloaders want something for nothing. Unions want me to pay them when I'm not a member. I refuse to pay and I'm a freeloader? LOLs.

Union members cannot answer what should be simple to answer questions so they ignore data proving them wrong. It doesn't exist. They lie about what unions have done for their members and especially for non-members. They call people that don't see the relevance of union names. Anything to distract and not answer the question.
You just wasted a lot of time while making yourself look silly by going back to the past and confusing cause with correlation. By the way, governments are notorious for putting out propaganda. I'd rather gather information from an independent research institution.

Once again, you're a freeloader, if you don't pay money to a union as a worker in a unionized workplace. If you're too helplessly blind and shut minded to see that as a fact, then I can only take pity out on you as a human being. Thank goodness, as a non-member, the union would be under no obligation to treat you to a meal at their meetings. If you don't like that, then don't ever get a job with a unionized workforce in the first place.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top