🇳🇱
I have always been a big supporter of #unions but lately I have been second-guessing that and debating with myself if I might actually change my views to be against unions....
My thinking is simple.. I am a huge supporter of anti-trust laws. Essentially I dont think companies should be allowed to create coalitions with the intention of price-fixing the market. This makes sense to me, companies **must** compete or else they can become too powerful.
If i believe in that logic then I should, by similar logic, be against unions. Unions are effectively large groups of people getting together to carry out price-fixing of their labour.
@freemo Unions is to give the workers a fair treatment, isn't it? To stop companies from acting like assholes to their workers.
Price-fixing labour sounds not as bad as price-fixing the market. After all, what is minimum wage if not price-fixing too? Or did you want to get rid of that as well?
@trinsec Everyone wants more, everyone thinks they arent treated fair. Companies think they pay too much for employees and may just as well view themselves as the one not getting fair treatment.
The anti-trust laws on companies is specifically there to ensure fair market value (no price fixing), so thats already how they get fair treatment.
I am also against minimum wage, it has caused enormous harm to the poor.
@freemo How does minimum wage cause harm to the poor?
@trinsec Because minimum wage is well known to cause unemployment shifts towards the poor... Higher minimum wage means hiring shifts so that fewer poor/low-educated people are hired and more higher-education people are hired. Minimum wage effectively increases unemployment amongst the group of people that you are trying to help (the poor) doing more harm than good.
@freemo Huh. That might be an American thing? Here, people are reluctant to hire well-educated people for low-skill jobs, because they tend to stay a short time because they'd get bored and move on to jobs that actually suit their level.
@trinsec No its pretty universal in the world... It isnt the result of high-education people getting hired for low skilled jobs. It is instead the fact that high-education positions that automate low-skilled jobs emerge. People are hired to build self-chekout machines and to maintain them, and the cashiers loose their job entierly. As minimum wage increases this accelerates.
@freemo *Giggles* Self-checkout machines are starting to fall in disfavor around here because theft is hugely on the rise due to inflation. Those companies aren't saving anything, just as a funny aside.
There's a personnel shortage everywhere, too. I'd say minimum wage is actually helping out a lot right now. If there was too many workers and not enough jobs, you'd have a point. But right now, not really.
> *Giggles* Self-checkout machines are starting to fall in disfavor around here because theft is hugely on the rise due to inflation. Those companies aren't saving anything, just as a funny aside.
Thats the thing there are plenty of downsides to self-checkout... which is why many store owners might be resistant to it. But the more you price-fix the cost of labour with minimum wage the more those down-sides are worth it since there is a point where the costs balance out.
When there is a shortage of workers you dont need unions, thats the point, market pressures increase your pay as is since companies now need to compete to hire you aware... So there really is no good argument for needing unions in that scenario.
@freemo We had teacher strikes, cop strikes, etc, because of the government's decisions. Only possible with unions because how else will you organize this? Here the strikes are usually against government, not so much against companies. At least, not at that large scale. How do you figure this will fit here?
@trinsec You wont have strikes, strikes shouldnt be allowed, that is price-fixing and would be no different than companies organizing together and refusing to give their services at the market price...
Now you CAN have protests, and those get organized all the time. So nothing stopping people from protesting these issues still.
No one is forced to work against their will, you can quit anytime, you can walk out anytime, you can threaten not to work until your demands are met.. this is all well and good. As long as you dont do it as a union (coordinated and organized).
Same on the anti-trust side.. companies are free to charge higher than market value on any product they want. But the second companies create coalitions and agree to fix the price for all the coalitions mutual benefit, it becomes illegal.
Because once the coverage starts to approach a whole niche you have complete control.
Imagine the extreme of either of these cases, where the vast majority of people and companies decide to collaborate. Price fixing allows you to set unfair prices that prevent competition from undercutting you as you can fix the price locally to beat your competition while raising the price marginally everywhere else to make up your costs. Then when your competition goes out of business you just bring prices higher int he area and recoup your costs again.
It completely prevents competition from arising and thus eliminates any possibility of a free market.
@freemo @trinsec , and yes, I recognize Walmart exists, and your model was their business model, and I know what it did to small towns. My argument is those small town refusing to allow people to just open up businesses without incorporation, taxation, regulations, etc were what allowed Walmart to do it.
Walmart was not the reason for anti-trust laws... anti-trust laws goes back way further.
If you are using refgulation to prevent businesses from opening because they got too big.. then you are implementing an anti-trust law already. But your "fix" doesnt address coalitions, at best that may address single companies getting too large.
No set of laws can fix human brokenness and depravity. No set of laws can even fully describe righteousness. This is analogous to Gödels' incompleteness theorem in mathematics. The positive ideal of righteousness is infinite in detail. As the number of laws, even good ones, increases, the ability to follow them as a guide decreases. This is why Paul writes to the Romans that "love is the fulfilling of the law".
This isnt theory, it already happened witht he gas industry and was the reason we needed anti-trust laws. This isnt theory, its history.
@freemo @trinsec Yes, I am aware. But imagine if the competition had been railroads, and electric vehicles, and home hydroelectric power generation? Right now the government requires you to use public services, often owned by private industries, or supplied by private industries. It wouldn't matter if all the gas industry all ran the market with price fixing, if the people had the choice to not buy from them.
@freemo @trinsec I argue that the only reason any group can control a whole niche is because the government regulates who can be part of the groups. Get rid of corporate cronyism, and allow competition, and those groups can't form.