General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsEveryone complains about rising prices, inflation, low incomes, rich getting richer, etc.
But how often do you see any discussion about any actual possible ideas for solutions to these problems?
Not very often, do you?
I personally have tried to discuss this here and even offered my idea for a solution.
My solution calls for having strong unions. Without strong unions there are no solutions to these problems.
But my idea, and the only one that has ever worked to solve these problems in the past, never gets any traction here.
Why do you think this is?
Don
rfranklin
(13,200 posts)They do not believe that anything will change if they do. It's a self-fulfilling prophecy but it works well for the oligarchs.
sinkingfeeling
(51,479 posts)coalition_unwilling
(14,180 posts)the percentage of the workforce represented by collective bargaining agreements has declined from approx. 30% to some 12% of the workforce. So even the Democratic Party over the past 30 years has moved away from an avowedly pro-labor agenda. Given those headwinds, I'd say you're like Don Quixote tilting at windmills. (I say that fondly and admiringly, not disparagingly
hunter
(38,335 posts)"If a window was broken or a drain was blocked up, someone was certain to say that Snowball had come in the night and done it, and when the key of the store-shed was lost, the whole farm was convinced that Snowball had thrown it down the well. Curiously enough, they went on believing this even after the mislaid key was found under a sack of meal."
Don't you go talking unions in front of Wal-Mart...
madokie
(51,076 posts)it was the unions that lifted the middle class up to begin with and with the busting of the unions thats been going on since st ronnie the raygun its been down hill all the way.
Personally I think that we also need to work on getting our Press back but back when I used to advocate for that I was once faced, when I asked why we didn't discuss that, maybe its because we don't all feel the same way as you do madokie. I've been a reader and replier pretty much ever since. I do feel there is a lot of good, more good than bad with DU but we've a lot of members who don't think like you and I do, who don't think about solutions rather they bitch and moan about the bad.
If rMoney and company gets in the whitehouse we're fucked six ways to Sunday and anyone who can't see that is blind. IMHO
obxhead
(8,434 posts)and spend all of that money advertising how great unions are. Setting up a "how to start a union" organization and having contact info in every one of those ads would be critical to the idea.
The attack on unions has allowed all of the problems you listed.
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)like we had under that notorious socialist Ike or even that commie-loving Nixon, reinstitute Glass-Steagall, end corporate welfare and make the corporations actually pay taxes.
Then we can start working on getting rid of Shitizens United, implementing single-payer and reining in the MIC that Ike warned us so presciently about.
raccoon
(31,127 posts)Hydra
(14,459 posts)But at this point, Capitalism itself is our enemy. Growth of 3-20%+ compounded every year is healthy? In what world? The world of the people who want to live off investments forever?
Do we want to slap a bandaid on the problem and go forward(FDR choose to do this) or do we want to reassess our values and pull down those in power who enshrined working yourself to death as a virtue?
There ARE plans and options being offered, but the idea that the Plutocrats could possibly be wrong is just too much a stretch for most people to accept.
leftstreet
(36,117 posts)On the Road
(20,783 posts)at least for unionized workplaces. But addressing inflation? How does raising the biggest cost of most businesses reduce prices?
NNN0LHI
(67,190 posts)I didn't care less about inflation when I had a way(A union contract with automatic Cost Of Living adjustments), to keep up with the rising Cost Of Living.
Without a union contract we are still going to have higher prices. Just no way to adjust for them.
Don
On the Road
(20,783 posts)for unionized workers. That makes sense.
lonestarnot
(77,097 posts)SoCalDem
(103,856 posts)for all the people who punch a time clock or fill out a time card.
and another for "salaried" people who make less than $50K a year
RepublicansRZombies
(982 posts)So we could return to the time before the Koch Brothers introduced oil speculation and before Goldman Sachs introduced the Goldman Sachs Commodity Index which enables the bankers to speculate on our necessities.
IT wasn't all that long ago that there were regulations that prevented this type of gouging us, however they removed them, prices through the roof with record profits for Goldman.
Why are we allowing speculation on our necessities?
The reason we lost all the jobs was the 'free' trade agreements.
We can just as easily reinstate tariffs to return tax revenue to the government from corporations.
We have had tariffs since the American revolution. Why did we allow them to end them?
Brickbat
(19,339 posts)It's hard to organize a union. Devastatingly hard. Dangerously hard. But people do it. People have died for it.
cthulu2016
(10,960 posts)Single-payer and a very large increase in the minimum wage.
On the Road
(20,783 posts)Workers have to vote to unionize. In geographically dispersed businesses like many retail, fast food, and service industries, it is almost impossible to effectively promote unions and get a positive vote. Same for many small businesses and areas in which most of the work force is averse to unions. (They may get comparable pay and benefits, so why bother?)
The only way to increase wages across low-wage workers in all industries and geographical areas is to raise the bottom to $12-15 an hour. It will mean some people will lose their jobs, but the net benefit would be very, very positive. (As a landlord, I pay $15.50 for semi-skilled labor and would never think of paying the current minimum wage.)
It would not only benefit people who currently make minimum wage. Businesses who recruit for job above minimum wage would have to adjust upwards as well. Much more efficient and effective IMO than trying to corral workers into organizing, bargaining, striking, and all the other things than come with a unionized workforce. I would rather go the opposite direction and have worker representation on the board.
And single-payer health care? Yes, that would help business a lot.
HooptieWagon
(17,064 posts)Avoid chain stores, do business with local shops. Barter. Grow your own. Do it yourself. Dump cable TV. Cut utilities to the bone. Recycle. Don't overinsure. Don't buy cheaply made new crap, buy well made stuff-used. Use PO rather than UPS or FedEx, whenever possible. Borrow DVDs from library, rather than rent. Swap kids toys and clothes with other families. Pull money from bank, use a credit union instead.
Taitertots
(7,745 posts)And "having stronger unions" is not a policy recommendation. It is nothing but a vague and meaningless suggestion.
Do you actually want to hear other people's policy recommendations? Here are mine.
1) Universal Single Payer health care
2) Tax Capital gains as regular income
3) Remove the cap on SS contributions
4) Cut Military Spending
5) Stop letting corporations pretend they are people
6) Make Shareholders liable for corporate debts
7) Raise the minimum wage to over $10.00 per hour
8) Institute national "Kurzarbeit" (Short work) to pay idle workers instead of firing them
9) Outlaw mortgage securitization
10) Legalize Marijuana
Scuba
(53,475 posts)... is fair elections. If we could just get fair elections, we could solve our other problems.
leftstreet
(36,117 posts)How would fair elections give us single payer nonprofit healthcare?
How would fair elections give us a massive WPA style jobs program?
The people must act, and the politicians will follow them
Scuba
(53,475 posts)leftstreet
(36,117 posts)wha...?
Scuba
(53,475 posts)Here in Wisconsin our elections are being stolen every time.
loli phabay
(5,580 posts)Is that everyone would want a raise in line with it. Would you work at a skilled or heavy labour job for the same money as someone on minimum wage.
gollygee
(22,336 posts)so the workers got a more fair shake.
BUT OF COURSE the owners hated that and everything is about the rich in this country. If the rich don't like it, it must be eliminated. Sigh.
Egalitarian Thug
(12,448 posts)doesn't want to be that kind of message board.
How often do you see TLDR/TLTR? How many times have you posted a thoughtful reply only to have the phraseology you use or the typo you missed become the center of the "discussion"?
RKP5637
(67,112 posts)mostly a result of the unions. I also think it is a class thing of sorts with some workers. Right or wrong, they saw union workers as lower class. That, is what I've run up against, particularly with those thinking they are temporarily disadvantaged millionaires in their low wage job. Pisses me off!
Vincardog
(20,234 posts)are the answer. The reason Unions won't work is because they do not attack the cause of the problem.
The Top Down Owner controlled model can only lead to the type if Tyranny of the rich we are facing.
The fundamental change we have to make is reclaim our work lives.
We have to QUIT working in and with the system that enslaves us.
It is that simple and hard.
Johonny
(20,905 posts)to have a strong union. I heard stories of what my great grandfather did in the old union days. People got beat up, people died. Is a company of software engineers ready to fight the way a steel workers or coal miners fought for strong unions? If not then you have to consider what Scuba is saying. If you can only have strong unions from legislatures making it vastly easier to form them, easier for general strikes etc... without them I don't see how you can get the union process started in a country where half(?) the states are design to kill them before they start. How can you have pro-worker legislature without trusting the election process?
lumberjack_jeff
(33,224 posts)The unionization which we've let collapse was established by a century of violence.
lumberjack_jeff
(33,224 posts)So long as labor is limitless, its value will continue dropping.
What is needed is a 32 hour workweek and double-time for overtime.
NNN0LHI
(67,190 posts)I voted on that contract.
We gave it back in our 1982 contract the year after Reagan fired the air traffic controllers and most Americans were stomping their feet they were so happy he fired them.
I wasn't able to vote on the 1982 contract due to being laid off at the time.
Not many people remember this.
Don
99Forever
(14,524 posts)Every working stiff in this Nation should work off the job tomorrow and not go back until they return ALL of the fairness to our world. But it won't happen because they have us by the short hairs. They have fighting each other for their fucking scraps.
So instead, what is far more likely, is violent revolution. Not calling for, not condoning it, just stating the obvious.
Sirveri
(4,517 posts)They only hire people because those people make them money. However eventually they take so much money out of their company that they ignore the very people who make it for them. If we effectively limit how much money they can extract then they will have no choice but to share the wealth, either via the government and added services for the rest of us, or by reducing their extraction and spending it on facility upgrades and higher wages.