« prev   random   next »

0
2

Poll: Californians Gradually Souring on Unions

By zzyzzx follow zzyzzx   2013 Dec 13, 3:41am 8,997 views   66 comments   watch   nsfw   quote   share    


http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/12/13/Poll--Californians-gradually-souring-on-unions

California has long been a union stronghold, but voters in the strongly Democratic state are gradually taking a more negative view of organized labor, a poll released Friday suggested.

The independent Field Poll said that by a narrow margin, more voters said unions do more harm than good, as opposed to those who see organized labor as generally beneficial.

The slide in support represents a turnaround from a 2011 Field survey, when more voters said unions resulted in more good than harm.

The shift comes at a time of ongoing labor conflicts in the state and nation, often involving government employee pensions and retirement benefits.

In the San Francisco Bay Area, two transit strikes this year caused headaches for hundreds of thousands of commuters. Retirement costs for government workers contributed to bankruptcies in three California cities in recent years _ Stockton, Vallejo and San Bernardino.

The cost of "public pensions are starting to crowd out the services that local governments can provide. That doesn't sit well with the public," pollster Mark DiCamillo said.

Compared to the earlier poll, unions lost ground across most age, political and demographic groups.

Since 2011 "virtually every voter subgroup now displays a shift toward a somewhat more negative view of labor unions than they had expressed previously," the survey found.

The poll of 1,002 registered voters, conducted Nov. 14 to Dec. 5, found that 45 percent said labor unions do "more harm than good."

That compared to 40 percent who said unions do "more good than harm."

The findings were nearly identical when voters were asked about labor unions, generally, or public employee unions.

Those viewing unions more negatively increased 10 percentage points from March 2011, while the percentage of those viewing unions as more beneficial dropped 6 points during the period, the survey said.

The Democratic Party has long had close ties to unions, but the survey found 30 percent of registered Democrats now say unions do more harm than good, up from 21 percent in the 2011 survey.

More than half of whites, 51 percent, say unions do more harm than good, up from 39 percent in 2011. Even in households with a union member, 31 percent said unions do more harm than good, up from 18 percent in 2011.

Several California mayors want voters to consider an initiative on next year's ballot that would amend the state Constitution to allow local governments to negotiate changes in pension benefits for current and future employees.

Last year, labor groups and other Democratic interests funneled at least $75 million into their drive to defeat Proposition 32, which would have starved unions of the tens of millions of dollars they use to finance campaigns and political organizing.

The survey had a margin of error of plus or minus 3.2 percentage points.

#politics

« First    « Previous    Comments 27 - 66 of 66    Last »

27   marcus   ignore (10)   2013 Dec 15, 8:20am     ↓ dislike (2)   quote   flag        

zzyzzx says

The only goal of unions is to line their own pockets

Again, made up BS. Some unions may have cut deals that gave their members (not the union itself) benefits that are too high. But for the most part they have negotiated reasonable pay and benefits.

If you dissagree with them, then you should argue for renegotiating rather than demonizing the unions.

Middle class pay for all types of work has been falling steadily for decades. Are you really dumb enough to think that ending all unions will help eleviate this ? Just how fricking gullible are you anyway ?

28   tatupu70   ignore (0)   2013 Dec 15, 8:21am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

zzyzzx says

The only goal of unions is to line their own pockets, at the expense of the middle class (who pay most of the taxes). That and to drive more companies to move overseas or bankrupt

Actually the goal of unions is to make companies pay reasonable wages to the folks that actually create the value. Instead of letting all the money flow to the executive bonuses and owners.

29   zzyzzx   ignore (1)   2013 Dec 15, 8:23am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

marcus says

Middle class pay for all types of work has been falling steadily for decades. Are you really dumb enough to think that ending all unions will help eleviate this

Getting rid of union thugs will prevent more jobs from relocating overseas and prevent municipal bankruptcies. Are you really dumb enough to believe that overpaid union thugs won't be replaced by imports in private industry, and cause yet still more municipal bankruptcies?

30   zzyzzx   ignore (1)   2013 Dec 15, 8:24am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

tatupu70 says

Actually the goal of unions is to make companies pay reasonable wages to the folks that actually create the value. Instead of letting all the money flow to the executive bonuses and owners.

Maybe 100 years ago...

31   marcus   ignore (10)   2013 Dec 15, 8:27am     ↓ dislike (2)   quote   flag        

zzyzzx says

Getting rid of union thugs

What the hell is a "union thug" other than a boogey man the koch brothers have programmed you to believe in. What fucking nonsense.

The truth is you are rooting against your own self interest, unless you are one of the plutocrats, who want nothing other than to have an even bigger piece of the pie.

32   marcus   ignore (10)   2013 Dec 15, 8:29am     ↓ dislike (2)   quote   flag        

SO calling union employees, such as California teachers who haven't gotten a raise since 2006 and who had pay cuts several of the interim years, "thugs," is what counts as high level reasoning and discourse in your lie filled world ?

The only thing worse than a liar is someone so stupid they don't even know they are lying.

33   zzyzzx   ignore (1)   2013 Dec 15, 8:30am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

marcus says

The truth is you are rooting against your own self interest, unless you are one of the plutocrats, who want nothing other than to have an even bigger piece of the pie.

How do I benefit from the high taxes and job losses caused by unions?

34   curious2   ignore (0)   2013 Dec 15, 8:36am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

marcus says

dissagree...eleviate

It's difficult to believe someone who can't spell but claims to be a teacher.

I support unions in principle but some specific unions seem to have been subverted in ways that cost everyone, for example in Milwaukee "health insurance of active employees total 38.8% of wages." The teachers make a reasonable salary, but the taxpayers pay almost twice that, with the difference going to dubious "benefits". As a previous comment observed on PatNet, subsidies in the absence of price controls are captured by the sellers, without benefit to buyers. We see this in housing ("helping homeowners"), education (guaranteed student loans), and especially medicine. Why are medical costs 10x higher here than across the border in MX? Subsidized mandatory insurance "benefits", which tend to be especially bloated in union contracts, are a major part of that problem.

35   marcus   ignore (10)   2013 Dec 15, 8:38am     ↓ dislike (2)   quote   flag        

zzyzzx says

How do I benefit from the high taxes and job losses caused by unions?

I can't guarantee that you persoanlly benefit (and I know that your selfishness rules you).

But it's obvious that if all public sector unions are dismantled and we step ever closer to being just another third world nation, with almost all middle class jobs gone, that's not good for America.

I guarantee you that there are plenty of high quality, highly trained and high integrity folks who chose careers in public servicve for a combination of reasons. Take teachers for example. There are plenty of people teaching who work really hard at it, and truly enjoy working with kids, but would not be doing it if it didn't provide a decent (and I do mean only decent) living.

Many Mish types will tell you that people will be lining up to do this work for half the pay and no benefits, when just a few years ago, teachers were hard to come by, and most quit in less than 5 years.

Sure right now, with the current economic and unemployment situation, we could probably pull off a pay decrease for cops, teacher and other public workers, just based on our current (and hopefully temporary) surplus of potential workers and college graduates etc.

But is that really what's good ?

Is that what we are going to do, every time automation lowers the number of workers needed ?

Are we just going to lower what they get paid ? I know that's great for the owners. But what about the rest of us ?

It's not really even good for the owners, because the economy needs consumers. But the small minded plutocrats are thinking of the shorter term and how to lower the cost of labor here.

36   zzyzzx   ignore (1)   2013 Dec 15, 8:40am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

marcus says

SO coalling union employees, such as California teachers who haven't gotten a raise since 2006 and who had pay cuts several of the interim years, "thugs," is what counts as high level reasoning and discourse in your lie filled world ?

Am I supposed to feel sorry for people who get paid high salaries, get generous pension benefits, only work 9 months of the year, and can retire as early as 55 with full pay?

http://www.teacherportal.com/salary/California-teacher-salary
Shows average salary at 67K

Which is quite high salary when you figure in the retirement benefits:
http://resources.calstrs.com/Calculators/strsbene14.plx

You plan to retire in 2013
Your age at retirement will be 55 years, 0 months.
Your Years of Credited Service will be 30.000
Your Age Factor based on your birth date, including career bonus, will be 0.01600
Your average monthly salary will be $ 5583

Then it shows :
The member-only monthly benefit shown below is calculated by multiplying your final compensation by your years of service credit and the age factor at the time of your retirement.
Service Credit X Age Factor X Final Compensation = Member-Only Monthly Benefit
YOUR ESTIMATED MEMBER-ONLY MONTHLY BENEFIT:
$2680.00

Shows them earning 32K per year in retirement. They probably get medical and dental on top of that as well.

If I change their age to 60 I get:
YOUR ESTIMATED MEMBER-ONLY MONTHLY BENEFIT:
$3885.00

If I change the age to 65 or higher, I get:
YOUR ESTIMATED MEMBER-ONLY MONTHLY BENEFIT:
$4220.00

In each case, they worked for 30 years, irregardless of their age. When I changed the 65 year old to 35 years of service, I get:
YOUR ESTIMATED MEMBER-ONLY MONTHLY BENEFIT:
$5090.00

In any case, it's rich compared to today's nonexistant private industry pension.

37   marcus   ignore (10)   2013 Dec 15, 8:43am     ↓ dislike (2)   quote   flag        

zzyzzx says

Am I supposed to feel sorry for people who get paid high salaries, get generous pension benefits, only work 9 months of the year, and can retire as early as 55 with full pay?

No, your supposed to pull gargantuan lies out of your ass like you and your retarded bretheren always do.

38   marcus   ignore (10)   2013 Dec 15, 8:46am     ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

zzyzzx says

You plan to retire in 2013

Your age at retirement will be 55 years, 0 months.

Your Years of Credited Service will be 30.000

Your Age Factor based on your birth date, including career bonus, will be 0.01600

Your average monthly salary will be $ 5583

.016 * 30 = .48

So that's 48% of full pay after working 30 years at 55.

That 5583 number would have to have come from assuming that a teacher makes 11,631 per month.

Yeah, right. Pay tops out in LAUSD at about 6K/month.

39   marcus   ignore (10)   2013 Dec 15, 8:48am     ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

zzyzzx says

You plan to retire in 2013

Your age at retirement will be 55 years, 0 months.

Your Years of Credited Service will be 30.000

again, although I know your type ignores truth....this from your own post (yes your lies).

Your Age Factor based on your birth date, including career bonus, will be 0.01600

Your average monthly salary will be $ 5583

.016 * 30 = .48

So that's 48% of full pay after working 30 years at 55.

That 5583 number would have to have come from assuming that a teacher makes 11,631 per month.

Yeah, right. Pay tops out in LAUSD at about 6K/month.

40   zzyzzx   ignore (1)   2013 Dec 15, 8:56am     ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

marcus says

THat's right, the form you filled out required you to put in an income number. Does 140K ring a bell ?

Anyway, as per Apocalypsefuck:
/?p=1235102&c=1033114#comment-1033114
Detroit *proves* that pensions destroy cities and societies if not entire culture and should be outlawed

41   marcus   ignore (10)   2013 Dec 15, 9:09am     ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

zzyzzx says

Detroit *proves* that pensions destroy cities and societies if not entire culture and should be outlawed

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confounding

When a city with public workers who were promised pensions gets into financial trouble, or for that matter when it happens to a business with workers that have pensions, it will always be the case that at the end the city or business can not afford it's pension commitments.

This is not anything close to proof that those pensions were the cause of the cities down fall.

What you say is like saying that all borrowing and debt is bad, and that when a business fails, it is always because they took out loans at some point.

Yes, when they get close to bankruptcy, their liabilities are a big problem. But that does not mean that the liability side of the balance sheet somehow was the cause of the businesses failure.

42   zzyzzx   ignore (1)   2013 Dec 15, 9:49am     ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

marcus says

.016 * 30 = .48

So that's 48% of full pay after working 30 years at 55.

That 5583 number would have to have come from assuming that a teacher makes 11,631 per month.

Yeah, right. Pay tops out in LAUSD at about 6K/month.

OK, I redid my calculations and re-edited with more results. Clearly some of these teachers will work other jobs and also collect social security, etc as well.

43   marcus   ignore (10)   2013 Dec 15, 9:58am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

zzyzzx says

In any case, it's rich compared to today's nonexistant private industry pension.

Except that that's just selfish and ignorant envy. Teachers have pay deducted from their check every month to pay about 8% into the fund for those 30 years. The state or local employer pays in as well. IT's simply a form of pay and forced savings (investment).

Yeah, it's a good deal. But not as good as you seem to think, and it doesn't cost the taxpayer as much as you think it does either.

44   marcus   ignore (10)   2013 Dec 15, 9:59am     ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

zzyzzx says

and can retire as early as 55 with full pay?

This is still a lie.

45   marcus   ignore (10)   2013 Dec 15, 10:03am     ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

zzyzzx says

Clearly some of these teachers will work other jobs and also collect social security, etc as well.

Not often. We don't pay in to social securtiy. We pay in to our pension plan, and the employer does too (much like they would if we were on SS).

The other thing is, you have no idea how hard the job is for many of us. The time off is needed from working so many nights and weekend hours and otherwise burning out.

46   marcus   ignore (10)   2013 Dec 15, 10:05am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

zzyzzx says

Anyway, as per Apocalypsefuck:

Except that he was being tongue in cheek.

47   jazz_music   ignore (12)   2013 Dec 17, 11:26am     ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

The argument against unions is a misdirect much like arguments against guns, government, drugs. Such rationales could be extended to floors and hammers.

E.g.: We don't like government because we can't seem to stop the wealthy business from driving it. (in '70's Reagan's writers coined 'starve the beast') We don't like drugs because sad troublemakers take drugs. We don't like unions because they got corrupted by some crooks.

Extensions: I don't like hammers because someone keeps hitting me on the head with a hammer.

Unions, like a government of the people, like guns, are potential tools against wealthy business and wealthy families driven by murderous greed for ever-increasing loot.

Democracy is intolerable to all those who are looking to take that last big payoff before this whole deal implodes. Don't you realize that our 'representatives' scoff at the idea of taking constituent's needs into consideration.

BUT WE DON'T HAVE THE LUXURY OF THROWING AWAY OUR TOOLS BECAUSE THEY GOT CORRUPTED BY POWERFUL CROOKS.

Basic: America had a middle class because unions were formed out of the considerable pain and sacrifice of seafaring men who rose up against ship owners during the depression. (such as Kennedys) Owners were maiming and killing men at sea to keep workers in line. The longshoremen were next, the teamsters followed.

In every case the push for, wait for it ... the bottom line ... rubs up against human life and limb so ... of course it became important to fault the dead guy until workers got tired of this and formed the first unions.

Not in a modern world??? Guess again. Lockheed Skunkworks made it an offense to national security to discuss with a doctor the toxic effects of working with composite aircraft materials for the F-117 stealth fighters. Ever seen bridges being built, skyscrapers? Lives are lost almost every time. And guess what ... they can usually pin it on the poor dead guy. I'd like to make that outcome more difficult.

United States' first Union was founded on October 14, 1938, came during the turbulent times of the Great Depression, and a worldwide economic slowdown. Longshoremen's union soon came and then the Teamsters.

I'd like to see job security re-invented, adequate health care, education, stability in housing.

Exceptionalists tout that Lincoln freed the slaves, but they never mention that USA made the biggest business ever out of slavery institutionalizing slavery into our economy even the Washington D.C. slave market stood no more than 300 feet from today's Capital Building.

Bottom line: School teacher pay and retirement is completely irrelevant when discussing economic inequality in USA.

Now please stop listening to the social poison that has, yet again, brought most of us down. We are not powerless. Remember there was a Martin Luther King? --that worked, didn't it? Distraction is a luxury that is costing us dearly by the day.

48   jazz_music   ignore (12)   2013 Dec 17, 11:38am     ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

marcus says

zzyzzx says

How do I benefit from the high taxes and job losses caused by unions?

I can't guarantee that you persoanlly benefit

zzyzzx sets up the false choice: high taxes and job losses versus unions and their boogeymen.

marcus, I guarantee you that we all have benefitted from worker's sacrifices and also from the sacrifices of civil rights demonstrators in the '60's.

We are all too far removed from those times of sacrifice and their motivations to see their perspective is all. And there aren't any Oil-Funded PBS documentaries on the subject either to make us feel detachedly smart either.

If you let media frame the story it all comes down to the same thing every time and that is "Buy this and fear that."

49   thomaswong.1986   ignore (5)   2013 Dec 17, 1:58pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

jazz music says

high taxes and job losses versus unions and their boogeymen.

marcus, I guarantee you that we all have benefitted from worker's sacrifices and also from the sacrifices of civil rights demonstrators in the '60's.

Guess, you can thank JFKennedy and his tax cut which created more jobs and
higher tax revenue collected for that one...

50   jazz_music   ignore (12)   2013 Dec 17, 3:17pm     ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

thomas, I can't parse your comment

51   thomaswong.1986   ignore (5)   2013 Dec 17, 3:24pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

jazz music says

thomas, I can't parse your comment

In the 1960s, Job boom created by

1) Hard working Union workers

2) Lower Income Taxes

52   FortWayne   ignore (4)   2013 Dec 18, 1:38am     ↓ dislike (2)   quote   flag        

What's there to like about unions?

The only thing we all see them constantly do is protest, undermine the state by picketing and disrupting, and constantly whine that they have to pay $5 copay for Cadillac health insurance plans that most people can't afford anyway. And bankrupting the state with exorbitant demands through thuggish behavior.

Lately I've heard some union in Bay Area disrupted and shut down some transportation because they are not getting high raises while being paid 3x what an average person makes in CA for a job that can be done after 1 week of training.

Unions have gone too far.

53   FortWayne   ignore (4)   2013 Dec 18, 1:39am     ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

marcus says

zzyzzx says

and can retire as early as 55 with full pay?

This is still a lie.

You can retire at 50 with 90% pay... that was passed with Gray Davis. Not that long ago.

54   edvard2   ignore (1)   2013 Dec 18, 1:43am     ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

This must make some of the rigt-leaning folks on the forum happy. Why- sooner or later they will all be so happy to be working for $5 an hour with no benefits but they will be happy to do so since they are making lots and lots of money for the billionaires that own the companies they work for, and hence deserve every penny. The are such eager pawns to happily comply with whatever right wing media and corporate-influenced lobbys tells them to believe in, that getting paid less and less is honorable and just.

55   jazz_music   ignore (12)   2013 Dec 18, 2:32am     ↓ dislike (2)   quote   flag        

FortWayne says

What's there to like about unions?

As edvard2 implies, unions are a tool against the never ending advancement of a wealthy few who can otherwise afford to turn every policy that government touches against the people with their money and their handlers who are rewarded handsomely for rendering us to irrelevance.

Government of the people is neutralized by opaque political finances restricting our voting ritual to merely slightly different flavors of self-defeat. In history economic inequality has always played out in this manner. Societal breakdown may herald meaningful change. Our societal failure of the great depression spawned a renaissance of economic equality for the people.

Who has not said they are voting for the lesser of two evils? How do you suppose it turns out that way? Our laws against bribery merely define a framework by which bribery can exist if it is structured to fall outside defined criteria.

PRISON INDUSTRY
The outlook is worse than edvard2 describes, increasingly people are working for almost no money at all as prisoners while making prison corporations rich. This phenomenon is true in this country than anywhere ever even as jobs disappear, they will reappear once you land in prison.

56   zzyzzx   ignore (1)   2013 Dec 18, 2:33am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

jazz music says

zzyzzx sets up the false choice: high taxes and job losses versus unions and their boogeymen.

No! I keep saying that we need import duties and mandatory made in USA requirements for everything that we can. That and a ban on immigration, outsourcing, and throw out the illegals. Do that and let the free market work and you will see unemployment and underemployment as practically non-existent and much higher average wages and standard of living in the US. Despite what you think, I (and most other conservatives) really do not have much of an issue with Unions in the private sector. Its the union leeches/thigs in the public sector that we really hate.

57   zzyzzx   ignore (1)   2013 Dec 18, 2:34am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

jazz music says

also from the sacrifices of civil rights demonstrators in the '60's.

Exactly how have I benefited from affirmative action?

58   zzyzzx   ignore (1)   2013 Dec 18, 2:36am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

marcus says

Except that that's just selfish and ignorant envy. Teachers have pay deducted from their check every month to pay about 8% into the fund for those 30 years. The state or local employer pays in as well. IT's simply a form of pay and forced savings (investment).

You do realize that only saving 8% of your pay for retirement doesn't fund your retirement? I mean you would have to save something more like at least 25% to 50% to get a more realistic number giving what everything costs (including the luxurious medical benefits for state retirees).

59   zzyzzx   ignore (1)   2013 Dec 18, 2:39am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

marcus says

Not often. We don't pay in to social securtiy. We pay in to our pension plan, and the employer does too (much like they would if we were on SS).

Lots of teachers work other jobs during the summer, and while in college (remember when people used to work through college?) and sometimes after they "retire" from being a teacher. So it's reasonable to believe that most teachers will also be getting something from Social Security. Probably not that much, but something is always better then nothing.

60   zzyzzx   ignore (1)   2013 Dec 18, 2:49am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

marcus says

Yeah, it's a good deal. But not as good as you seem to think, and it doesn't cost the taxpayer as much as you think it does either.

If you use Detroit as an example, their pension fund is underfunded by around 500K per retiree. And that does count the medical expenses for them. And that is just for the underfunded part, the total is much higher.

Shows 9.2 - 9.9 Billion total pension underfunding (I am including retiree benefits). Divided by 22,000 retirees, that's around 500K per retiree. And that's just for the underfunded part.

How expensive is this supposed to be?

61   edvard2   ignore (1)   2013 Dec 18, 3:10am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

zzyzzx says

Lots of teachers work other jobs during the summer, and while in college (remember when people used to work through college?) and sometimes after they "retire" from being a teacher. So it's reasonable to believe that most teachers will also be getting something from Social Security. Probably not that much, but something is always better then nothing.

My Mother retired after 40 years of being a public school teacher. Most people fail to realize that most teachers work a lot of off the clock ours grading papers, setting up schedules, reading ,materials for upcoming classes, and running to the store for supplies. Teachers are also not exactly paid that well. I make 2.5 times more than my mom even though she was in the workforce for almost twice as long as I have so far.

Teachers are one of the most important professionals in society. Yet they also get paid little for that importance. So when I hear people complain about their pensions and benefits, they tend to have no clue what its really like to be a teacher. Those teachers absolutely deserve those pensions given their years of underpaid service to their communities.

Lastly- if more and more initiatives are put into place that makes teaching less desirable as a career then those who complain now about teachers will have a lot more to compain about come the day that the upcoming generations of kids wind up being too uneducated to secure the types of jobs that grow the economy.

62   zzyzzx   ignore (1)   2013 Dec 18, 4:01am     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

edvard2 says

Lastly- if more and more initiatives are put into place that makes teaching less desirable as a career then those who complain now about teachers will have a lot more to compain about come the day that the upcoming generations of kids wind up being too uneducated to secure the types of jobs that grow the economy.

If current trends continue, an even higher % of our cashiers and waiters will have college degrees. Exactly why should I be worried about us being undereducated?

63   dublin hillz   ignore (0)   2013 Dec 18, 4:08am     ↓ dislike (2)   quote   flag        

Those who oppose unions are technically more dangerous than al queda/taliban to american citizens. While al queda/taliban may want me dead, their chances of success are relatively nil. However, american anti union voters have a much higher chance of electing politicians to use the power of government to dismantle public sector unions or donate to corporate super pacs to diminish whatever power private sector unions have left. That being said, I don't think these dangerous voters should be shipped off to guantanamo - I do believe in freedom of speech. But hopefully, they will see the light one day...

64   dublin hillz   ignore (0)   2013 Dec 18, 4:11am     ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

zzyzzx says

edvard2 says



Lastly- if more and more initiatives are put into place that makes teaching less desirable as a career then those who complain now about teachers will have a lot more to compain about come the day that the upcoming generations of kids wind up being too uneducated to secure the types of jobs that grow the economy.


If current trends continue, an even higher % of our cashiers and waiters will have college degrees. Exactly why should I be worried about us being undereducated?

Well humanities majors were always at a higher risk of ending up in that predicament. Off-shoring has simply moved up the risk curve to include people in tech/it.

65   dublin hillz   ignore (0)   2013 Dec 18, 4:15am     ↓ dislike (2)   quote   flag        

Also, lets not forget that collective bargaining simply balances the scales. In private sector, companies are naturally collectively organized on management side via HR departments. Unions attempt to create the same bargaining ability via strength in numbers for their members. And it can make drastic difference. I think 50% of compensation/benefits package are based on nature of the job but the other 50% are based on collective bargaining ability. So for example you can have a scenario where a unionized social worker will make less than a software engineer from google, but will make significantly more than a so called "account manager" for a non-unionized small biz company. That's the benefit of collective bargaining.

66   jazz_music   ignore (12)   2013 Dec 18, 4:26am     ↓ dislike (2)   quote   flag        

zzyzzx says

how have I benefited from affirmative action?

Opportunity for education regardless of race, gender or age made our country better able to work, you can ill afford to have large swaths of the population languishing in poverty's degradation. Bad, expensive things happen.

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/impact.html

You imply that affirmative action resulted in nothing more than reverse discrimination. But the racial economic gap remains high and unemployment among blacks is about double the national average.

Assuming that you are not merely trolling on your own thread here, I recommend using search engine www.duckduckgo.com and enter "broader benefits of civil rights movement in america." There is a lot to read since you ask the question.

As the non-wealthy people, we are not so different from the those who were relegated to society's bottom rungs. Trending more so all the time since the Reagan administration. Especially since economic inequality moves towards unheard of extremes. Imagine something beyond your control transforming you into non-optimal for unemployment and not having parents to fall back on. Where will you go? This is partly why we need to provide for the bottom rung and elevate their station instead of applaud the defeat of the more vulnerable. Don't vilify the poor, that could be you sooner than you think.

« First    « Previous    Comments 27 - 66 of 66    Last »


about   best comments   contact   one year ago   suggestions