What is the idea of the American dream, of working hard and achieving something, and knowing that all, you know, half your wealth is going to someone who didn't do that?
So asked CNBC's Maria Bartiromo Thursday during a stirring discussion with a union advocate who had the nerve to claim the problems in the auto industry were all caused by a lack of a nationalized healthcare system, and that only the top one percent of wage earners in America should pay federal income taxes.
Unlike most media members who would have applauded such sentiments coming from one of their guests, Bartiromo pushed back, with respect and professional courtesy not seen much from journalists these days, and in a fashion that would make many Americans currently concerned about their nation's direction a wee bit nostalgic and tremendously proud.
What follows is a partial transcript of this exchange, as well as an embedded video of the entire segment:
MARIA BARTIROMO, HOST: Welcome back. The Senate is working with compromise legislation to make it easier for workers to join unions, better known as Card Check. Meanwhile, an op-ed in today's Wall Street Journal argues that public sector unions are playing unfairly attempting to steer stimulus dollars their way and killing anti-tax movements. Steve Malanga is a senior fellow with the Manhattan Institute who wrote that op-ed. Also with us is Jonathan Tasini, executive director of the Labor Research Association. Gentlemen, good to see you, thanks for joining us. [...]
Jonathan, let me ask you this, Jonathan, okay, unions are of course representing workers. But when you look at the number of industries that are dominated by unions, the performance is not so great, right? Airlines, autos, teachers, so, what else? Why is that? Is there a connection?
JONATHAN TASINI, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR LABOR RESEARCH ASSOCIATION: If I can first address the main point: thank God for the public sector unions. Because if it wasn't for the public sector unions, and the stimulus money coming to states to save jobs, this economy would not just be in a so-called recession, we'd be at the bottom of the abyss. It's actually the stimulus money that has saved part of the economy and kept that sector going while in fact the private sector has declined because there's no credit as you well know in the private sector, and jobs have been lost like crazy.
BARTIROMO: Right, but that's one of the points, because one of Steve's arguments is that the federal stimulus dollars are distributed to the unions, or to, they're steering the funds, hold on, they're steering the funds to projects that are basically preserving public sector jobs, their own jobs. Not other jobs.
TASINI: Okay, so let's talk about what those jobs are. Well, the reality is that the money coming from the government does come to the state governments to spend. And because the private sector is, was contracting, the only place you could actually have jobs was building roads, rebuilding schools, these are very good things. I'm all for that, and I believe that most of the public is for that. You know, Steve is making an argument that is sort of drifting away from him, from the people, the kind of argument he's supporting. The truth is that the majority of the public is really with this kind of spending, supports this kind of spending. I think that's shown in both the support for President Obama's stimulus package and the spending at the state level. Now, I want to address your point about these industries. Let's take the auto industry for example. You cannot blame the unionized workers for the state of the auto industry. That's pure mismanagement, not the least of which is continued to refuse to have a single-payer medicare for all healthcare system which would have relieved tens of billions of dollars of healthcare costs from the -- let me finish -- from the auto industry and the steel industry. The problem of much of the industry in America, the industries you're talking about, has nothing to do with wages, nothing to do with union workers. You...
BARTIROMO: What are you talking about? The autos had all those legacy costs in place. They're paying people who are putting their feet up and just relaxing at home on the sofa, and they're not on the assembly line.
TASINI: UAW members could work for free and you would not save the auto industry...
BARTIROMO: Because they're paying the people that are not on the assembly line. They're at home.
TASINI: The way you solve the problem of the auto industry and the steel industy, many other industries, is you have a national healthcare system. You take the burden of the tens of billions of healthcare costs off the companies, and have a normal healthcare system like the rest of the industrialized world.
Stop the tape. So, if America's taxpayers would foot the bill for the healthcare of the auto industry, these companies would suddenly be profitable? Great. But who foots THAT bill?
BARTIROMO: Steve, do you agree with that?
STEVEN MALANGA, SENIOR FELLOW MANHATTAN INSTITUTE: Well, of course, one of the things that this doesn't contemplate is that if the employers aren't paying healthcare costs, somebody else is. The irony here is that in the public sector, we do have the public sector paying healthcare costs. Healthcare benefits for public employees are paid by government, and they are part of what's driving governments like New York state, New York City, and California broke. The idea that there's sort of money out there somewhere that doesn't come from the private sector and that that money if government just spends it will cure things, you know, it just doesn't recognize the fact that this money has to come from somewhere. So, in a national healthcare system, where's that money going to come from?
BARTIROMO: Taxes. Higher taxes.
MALANGA: Right.
TASINI: Well, actually you would save money, you would save money at the end of the day...
BARTIROMO: How are you saving money because you're going to be spending more money on healthcare? Healthcare is 17 percent of the GDP. You're telling me that it's going to go lower? No, I don't think so. It'll be a higher percentage of GDP.
MUCH higher, Maria. Of course, the union advocate was having nothing of that:
TASINI: Medicare is one of the most successful programs we've had in the history of this country. It operates at two or three percent administrative costs. The reason our healthcare costs are so high is because you've got a profit mongering industry that pays its executives too high, and spends 20 percent or 30 percent on adminstrative costs for what reason? To spend billions of dollars every day to prevent people from having healthcare. Now that's a moral obscenity. But I do want to address the other point about the state costs. There are two reasons states are in trouble in terms of their budget. One is the overall collapse of the economy thanks to Bernie Madoff, Wall Street, AIG, and all your other friends. The second point is this: we do not have a progressive taxation system anymore. In New York state, which Steve and I both live in, if we went back to a more progressive taxation system, and taxed just the top one percent, we would have about eight or nine billion dollars more which would solve the crisis.
Stop the tape. States are in trouble because of the economy? Really? Their problems have NOTHING to do with runaway spending?
Beyond this, we should ONLY tax the top one percent in the nation, meaning that 99 percent DON'T contribute at all?
Be afraid, America:
BARTIROMO: Look, I can't allow you to fan the flames of class warfare on this program. You said, you said "Wall Street and all your other friends." Who's they?
TASINI: Class warfare is, does exist in this country. The problem is, the class that's being affected are 95 percent of the population. Are you telling me there isn't class warfare in this country?
Interesting, don't you think? We're currently close to less than half the population paying federal income taxes, and this union advocate thinks the class warfare is affecting 95 percent of the population. Moreover, his solution is that the top one percent should shoulder ALL the burden.
Fortunately for those lucky to see this segment, Maria wasn't putting up with this nonsense:
BARTIROMO: Well, workers are being affected, however, I'm trying to get at the point of why we have these troubled...
TASINI: We have the biggest gap between rich and poor that we've ever had in probably a hundred years. Productivity in the last 30 years has skyrocketed, and workers have gotten not benefited, that is the definition of class warfare.
BARTIROMO: Steve, what do you say to that?
MALANGA: Well, the first thing I say to that is all you have to do is look around us. We live in a country now where the average number of families has two cars, three televisions, air conditioning is standard in most houses. The idea that you just look at income and say, "Oh my God, income hasn't increased, therefore people are falling behind," the standard of living of the average American today is far, far ahead of the standard of living of the average American living in the 1960s, and the 1930s.
BARTIROMO: Meanwhile, the unions have their benefits. That's the point that I just made about people, you know, we're paying for benefits, we're paying salaries for people who are no longer on the assembly line. I mean, look, it's just not, you know, having a job for life is not a concept that I understand, because, you know, at some point, you're not getting paid for life. It's just, maybe you do in Europe, that's a socialist concept.
TASINI: Well, you just, I mean you're just throwing around the word socialist concept, I mean Europe bashing...
BARTIROMO: Who's throwing it around?
TASINI: Well, I actually think we could learn a lot from the way Europe treats its...
BARTIROMO: So, you want us to go the European way?
TASINI: For example, there was just a great piece in the New York Times about Norway, and explaining how it has actually expanded its coverage and protection of people. I would argue that people in Norway probably live a better standard of living than most people in this, than many people in this country.
BARTIROMO: Well, the economies of Europe have been in the dumps for, for years, even before this economic slowdown even started. You think that, you think the socialist measures have anything to do with that?
TASINI: Well, what I found interesting is both Steven and both you have ignored the two points that I've made which is that we have the greatest inequality that we've had in the last hundred years, and the most important point I tried to make was productivity. Productivity in the last 30 year is soaring. That means...
BARTIROMO: But what is redistribution of wealth going to do for productivity? What is, what is the idea of the American dream, of working hard and achieving something, and knowing that all, you know, half your wealth is going to someone who didn't do that? What is that going to do to productivity is my question.
Beautifully stated. And, much like when Joe the Plumber asked a similar question of candidate Obama last year, the truth came out:
TASINI: Well, when I talked about my proposal for a different taxation system here, I talked about affecting the top one percent. We're talking about redistributing the wealth a little bit, five percent in this state...
Redistributing the wealth "a little bit!" Ain't that grand?
BARTIROMO: Right...
TASINI: ...to, from the top one percent. 95 percent of the people would have a tax cut...
Nice. 95 percent get a tax cut, and the people that likely employ them get a HUGE tax increase:
BARTIROMO: Right...
TASINI: ...if you went back to the taxation system we had in the 1970s which was far more progressive.
Yes, the lovely '70s, that decade most economists view as one of the worst in American history. That's what we should strive for:
BARTIROMO: Right.
TASINI: We just, you guys want to ignore the reality of the math.
No. We're not ignoring the reality of one of the highest inflation rates ever in our nation's history.
Quite the contrary, we're fearing that you and the administration you support are going to bring back those bad old days.
That said, bravo, Maria.
CNBC has been taking a lot of heat lately, but the reality is this network continues to be one of the nation's strongest advocates for capitalism, and employs many folks willing to ask the tough economic questions most in the media today refuse to.
—Noel Sheppard is the Associate Editor of NewsBusters. Follow him at Facebook and Twitter.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Leftists will do everything
May 15, 2009 - 02:00 ET by MrSnugglesLeftists will do everything to avoid blaming the problems in the auto industry on unions. If not for the unions, they would not be making the legacy payments and paying out ridiculous salaries to uneducated, barely skilled laborers.
The management
May 15, 2009 - 08:16 ET by Lajawis just as culpable as the unions. Why did they go along with all the demands?
Legacy Costs
May 15, 2009 - 08:58 ET by CaringwhiteguyAnd it was management decades ago that threw paid health insurance into the contract negotiation mix. Management wasn't going to bend on actual pay raises, but cheap health care salved some union demands.
Re Legacy
May 15, 2009 - 09:54 ET by slickwillie2001Not to forget, it was foolish government wage and salary freezes during World War II that led to fringe benefit packages that included medical care. Just another unintended consequence of bad government policies.
What will the Bamster's attempted control of salaries and bonuses in the financial industry lead to? Offshore basing of high-value employees, for one.
Yes, they are culpable, but...
May 15, 2009 - 09:26 ET by IndyAdamYes, the management is culpable for the situation they are in. However, the unions had them by the B@lls so tightly, that they caved in to concessions. When unions, in companies such as the auto industry, strike, it can cost the company millions per day.
You know you have a problem, when 35% of the cost of a car you buy from the big 3, goes to paying the healthcare of the union workers.
They should have filed for bankruptcy protection "before" the O... (...my God what have we gotten ourselves into) came into office, forcing the unions to the table to make concessions in order to put a more competitively-priced product on the market. This, in my humble opinion, was why Honda and Toyota & Subaru were eating their lunch.
For years, the UAW had been touting "Buy American". However, when the Japanese mfr's built plants in the US and mfr'd using US labor, that marketing concept was shot full of holes. Even now, most of the autos put out by the big 3 are not truly "American Made"; not even 100% "American Assembled". They have not been for years, because they "knew" they would not be able to be competitively priced.
Bottom line is, we don't have to let them "fail" (go out of business). We just have to have them go through the process that every other company goes through to "lean" themselves out in order to stay afloat (Bankruptcy/Restructuring).
Now, the O... (...my God what have we gotten ourselves into) has gotten his greedy little union coddling fingers into the pie and the pie might just be gone before we are able to get his fingers out again.
Re hindsight
May 15, 2009 - 10:29 ET by slickwillie2001Yep, hindsight is 20/20. Had they launched bankruptcy under President George W. Bush, he likely would not have illegally interfered and micromanaged it. They likely would have been through it to a great extent by now, and stronger for it. Too bad. On the other hand, anyone with a brain could have looked at the Bamster's history and read the coffee grounds.
Isn't it nice to know
May 16, 2009 - 00:35 ET by ahusserThat the billions in bailout money given to Chrysler and GM is going down the crapper. They are going bankrupt anyway. Just a waste of taxpayers dollars (again and again and again etc. etc. etc.). The universal dem refrain will be (in a whiny voice) 'at least we tried to do something' (to save the industry, corporation, children or whatever).
These sentiments are what the road to hell is paved with. This bailout 'experiment' was an excercise in futility. A panicked response by liberals who don't even pretend to understand what was going on in the economy to either be seen as 'doing something', a power grab along leftist/socialist lines or a disguised payback of political favors. A time honored political perpetual failure machine.
"Somehow, I told you so, just doesn't quite say it." Will Smith in 'I, Robot.'
Go question
May 15, 2009 - 11:11 ET by gmaniac1That's always been the most puzzling thing to me.
When the people fear the government it's called tyranny, when the government fears the people it's called liberty!
Stupidity and shortsightedness are institutionalized
May 15, 2009 - 12:03 ET by Chris Norman"The management is just as culpable as the unions. Why did they go along with all the demands?"
I think it's a big instututional thing. Like how local and state governments are being driven bankrupt by fat public worker union contracts. Whenever an institution gets too big this is the kind of thing that happens.
The "Mainstream" Media: By liberals. For liberals.
Great job of fisking,
May 15, 2009 - 05:35 ET by motherbeltGreat job of fisking, Noel!
May I add something? <assumes consent>
What is, what is the idea of the American dream, of working hard and
achieving something, and knowing that all, you know, half your wealth
is going to someone who didn't do that? What is that going to do to
productivity is my question.
It doesn't do a thing for productivity, but it's for the purposes of "fairness," as the President explained his rationale for increasing capital gains taxes.
They might say "Wow, that sucks!" But at least they'll say "Wow!" -Duff Goldman, the Ace of Cakes
New reason for socialization
May 15, 2009 - 06:18 ET by Red JeepTasini: You cannot blame the unionized workers for the state of the auto industry. That's pure mismanagement, not the least of which is continued to refuse to have a single-payer medicare for all healthcare system which would have relieved tens of billions of dollars of healthcare costs from the -- let me finish -- from the auto industry and the steel industry.
The left is using a new reason for national health care. If only national health care were in place years ago the car industries and other large industries would not be in trouble today. See the unions are not the problem. Socialization is the answer, etc., etc., etc...
If only national health
May 15, 2009 - 07:37 ET by rimskyIf only national health care were in place years ago the car industries and other large industries would not be in trouble today.
The only certain thing that would have been different is that the P&L's of these industries would theoretically have shown lower total operating expenses.
But, consequently, since the burden of those government imposed healthcare costs would have been spread over the entire taxpayer population, disposable income would have been measureably less and therefore many people wouldn't even have entertained the thought of buying a new car, TV, etc.
These socialists don't care about the health of the economy. They are ALL about seizing power. Period.
If national healthcare were
May 15, 2009 - 09:29 ET by IndyAdamIf national healthcare were established years ago, nobody would be able to afford to buy a car anyway.
Spot on, Indy!
May 15, 2009 - 10:54 ET by rimskySpot on, Indy!
Hopeless change
May 15, 2009 - 06:26 ET by DontFeedTheTrollsWhat is, what is the idea of the American dream, of working hard and
achieving something, and knowing that all, you know, half your wealth
is going to someone who didn't do that?
Didn't Obama just give a speech to a graduating class where he said (basically) the American dream was really a nightmare that was destroying the world and, hey kids, don't work to better yourselves and your families, get a job for no pay where you help deadbeats remain deadbeats and throw in a little voter fraud?? Audience applauded also. Is this the 'Hope and Change' we got?
D
Keep the ILLEGALS out, join NumbersUSA to send free faxes to your reps.
I heard a bit of that
May 15, 2009 - 07:07 ET by motherbeltI heard a bit of that speech on TV (before I made my husband change the channel) and it was exactly that part that you are talking about.
What the heck are they supposed to do with their education and degrees!
Does he think they are all going to have a couple of big book deals laid at their doorstep and then go into politics???
Talk about blowing sunshine up their graduation robes!!
They might say "Wow, that sucks!" But at least they'll say "Wow!" -Duff Goldman, the Ace of Cakes
mb: "Talk about blowing sunshine up their graduation robes!!"
May 15, 2009 - 07:50 ET by mom_roxmb - thanks for the lol!
~~save your tea, dump congress~~
Idiocracy
May 15, 2009 - 06:37 ET by 10ksnookerWatch the movie. It's the fuutre -- "The Future Is A No Brainer"
Idiocracy was a thought
May 15, 2009 - 08:24 ET by ThatDudeIdiocracy was a thought provoking movie even if I thought some aspects ludicrous at the time. One thing I feel the need to mention about it is that the movie is very anti-capitalist. It makes sense that any organization seeking too much control would lead to such a bleak future. The problem we have is that those in power seek to gain power over every individual as part of a collective. True debate and research is stifled in favor of shrill cries of "I'm right." The day people stop thinking is indeed a sad day for everyone.
delete. double
May 22, 2009 - 08:17 ET by ThatDudedelete. double
For every action there is an equal and oposite reaction...
May 15, 2009 - 07:21 ET by c5thenThese folks are pretending that government money comes out of thin air and not from the economy. Most people, educated by our lovely government schools, are too stupid and uneducated to see the lie in that idea. Every dollar that the government collects in "receipts" is a dollar taken out of the economy. And every dollar borrowed by the government is $1.10 out of the future economy to pay for it plus the interest.
If NY State instituted a tax system where the top 1% of earners paid all the taxes and almost no one else did, the top 1% would leave in a year and go to NJ, CT, MA, PA, NH, VT, etc., leaving the next tier to pay all the tax. Then those top 1% would leave (after all these are rich folks who can live anywhere they want), and so on down to the current middle class.
This is why those who advocate the wealth distributing "progressive tax" also advocate for a socialistic society and an all powerfull Federal Government. Otherwise the "top 1%" would have the choice of going somewhere else. If it was all uniform, there would be no escape except to another country. And that explains why factories have been built in other countries and not here. GM is going to make almost half their fututre cars in China. Way to go UAW! I bet that wasn't your plan was it?
It always amazes me how these "experts" can be so short sighted and not be able to logically predict the reactions to their proposals.
Hey, I got the wrong "CHANGE"!
www.loyaltoliberty.com
To be clear, every dollar that the gub'mint
May 15, 2009 - 08:33 ET by WhoIsJohnGaltcollects in taxes is not "taken out of the economy". After all, it is spent somewhere, right? If we use the example at hand and say that the dollar they take from me is then given to some schlub on a couch somewhere, that schlub will spend it on food, beer, a new TV, whatever. After the tax collector takes his 30% overhead.
The real issue is the problems that the redistribution approach creates, such as disincentivizing (is that a word?) the creation of wealth, the discouraging of individual initiative. And of course, the biggest problem with government interference is that it spends money where it is not best spent. Some party that has no interest in the transaction gets in there and favors one or the other outcome. That is nowhere near efficient. The parties involved in the transaction should be the ones to determine the outcome's value to them, free from an overseeer's meddling.
I work with a gentleman who believes in anti-gouging laws, as in the case of a hurricane leaving certain items in short supply. Let's use milk as an example. The gub'mint steps in and says that milk will not cost more than $4 per gallon during this difficult period. Problems:
So why should a beaureacrat decide who gets milk? Does he know who truly values it? Instead, let prices run, and the farmers and retailers will make extra efforts and spend more to bring milk to the market if their efforts are financially rewarded. Individuals who have an oustanding need for milk will determine if it is worth $8 per gallon, while thos who decide they don't need it THAT bad will stay away from it.
Keep the transactions between those best positioned to determine the deal's value. If a company makes crappy cars, let them fail. Instead, we see gub'mint propping up a car company and telling them how to build cars. Will anyone buy them? What do you think? Next, mark my words, when GM and Chrysler sales continue to fall, Obama will incentivize the purchase of a crappy car...and on and on.
Whois
May 15, 2009 - 09:49 ET by NorthCoasterI recall a couple of wonderful cars from Yugoslavia and the USSR. Anyone out there recall the YUGO and the LADA? How many second time buyers of these small cheap vehicles were there?
Wonderful cars weren't they? This is the direction that GM and Chrysler are heading if the Gubmint of the "O", ends up with control over design, production and distribution.
Yes, I heard that O told Chrysler
May 15, 2009 - 12:23 ET by WhoIsJohnGaltto cut their advertising budget in half. Great. So how do you sell cars without advertising to match the competition in kind?
Maria is one of this
May 15, 2009 - 08:00 ET by NewsbusterbrownMaria is one of this American's dreams. :-D
“There are no easy answers' but there are simple answers. We must have the courage to do what we know is morally right.” - Ronald Reagan (1964 Republican Convention)
I don't care what her
May 15, 2009 - 08:22 ET by LumenNationI don't care what her politics are, Maria Bartiromo is my American Dream. Yummm
Shameless Protection Of Turf
May 15, 2009 - 08:35 ET by dboYou cannot blame the unionized workers for the state of the auto
industry. That's pure mismanagement, not the least of which is
continued to refuse to have a single-payer medicare for all healthcare
system which would have relieved tens of billions of dollars of
healthcare costs from the -- let me finish -- from the auto industry
and the steel industry. The problem of much of the industry in America,
the industries you're talking about, has nothing to do with wages,
nothing to do with union workers.
Why is it then, Mr. Union Monopoly Guy, that GM and Chrysler in Canada require the same bailout as the parent company in the US? Both have been bleeding red ink for years/decades despite Canada's "free" healthcare system. And just like the US, bailout money in Canada first requires the union to negotiate a new deal with their employer.
Unions Destroy Industry
May 15, 2009 - 08:44 ET by slickwillie2001Union thugs have destroyed industry after industry in our country and the union movement doesn't give a damn. They would rather see an entire industry fail, than fail to unionize that industry.
In the case of the UAW, their corrosive effect on the industry has been much more than simply the hourly wage rate and pension terms. The UAW contract is 1,200 pages long, and it dictates bizarre rules for required overtime, what cars can be built in what plants, ridiculous job-security clauses for workers, rules against worker versatility, etc. Unions have very successfully fought increased mechanization and robotics in factories, which increases costs and lowers efficiency.
If you look at the costs and efficiency of the Japanese non-union automakers in the USA, their greater performance is due to more than simply a lower wage. It is due to the absence of a thug union contract that dictates and restricts the company's every move. Many unions are little better than organized crime.
Y'know...
May 15, 2009 - 08:54 ET by Mike Sargent...watching Bartiromo do this, I'm reminded of a short scene in the movie "Ocean's Eleven", in which the control-room thieves are watching the guys in the vault pack up the money...and Saul says to the others:
"That is the sexiest thing I have ever seen."
Word.
Maria Bartiromo
May 15, 2009 - 09:22 ET by nolotrippenMaria Bartiromo has a new fan!
Go Lakers. No really. I mean it.
Maria
May 15, 2009 - 09:54 ET by NorthCoasterMaria is spot on.
She has revealed, that the King has no clothes!
The day I knew I was anti union.....
May 15, 2009 - 10:20 ET by JTPBeing a resident of the Michigan there are obviously many automotive related companies here. In 1982 I had just completed my apprenticeship as a journeyman tool and die maker at a small die shop. The GM stamping plant in Lansing was hiring at the time I finished it so just being married with a new kid on the way I wanted to increase my wages. I went to the plant for an interview and a tour with the tool room supervisor. The plant was clean and very busy and the stamping presses all full with lots of noise. Some of the presses had workers standing on each side with no work being done. I asked the supervisor why they were not working and he told me they were waiting for parts to run. As we walked around I also saw 3 fork trucks parked in different areas with the drivers all sleeping with newspapers over their faces. I asked why they were not getting fresh parts to the operators that were waiting and he told me that they were not allowed to because it was not their area and would get written up by the union if they did. Where I was working at the time these people would be FIRED for sleeping and not making the plant more productive. After the tour we sat and talked and I was offered the job at 30% more than I was making. I declined his offer. I could not work in that environment. The plant is now closed. A couple years later I was working for a machine building company and made many visits to ALL of the big 3 plants for set up and repair of our machines we supplied to them. Some of the ridiculous union rules to follow or have your company written up and possibly be eliminated as a supplier were: Do not plug in anything. An electrician must be called for all connections or disconnections. Do not turn anything off or on. Again call an electrician to turn power on or off. Do not disconnect or connect air lines. A union plumber must be called for any air or water connections. Do not move anything heavy. A union rigger must be called to move it. God forbid if you wanted to drill a hole. A machinist had to be found and scheduled to do this. Most of the time it would take hours for these union workers to get there to complete the simplest function like unplugging an extension cord. If you complained to management you were told that "thats just the way it is". Most jobs that could be done in an hour would take days to complete.
I now own a company and attend trade shows at big halls where the setup and tear down must be done by union workers. To plug in an extension cord $35, to change a lightbulb $35, to place covering over a table $50, to vacuum carpet each night $75, to move in a display $500 etc... And don't get caught doing these things yourself or you are heavily fined.
So, Mr Tasini, you tell me who is ignoring the reality of the math. If you think the economy can last with the demands the unions make on the companies they work for or just transfer the responsibility to the American people then I believe you are the one who is mathimaticlly challenged.
"Live for yourself...there's no one else more worth living for.
Begging hands and bleeding hearts will only cry out for more"- Rush--Anthem
Re anti-union
May 15, 2009 - 10:42 ET by slickwillie2001I've run into that tradeshow problem myself, I think it was in Dallas. It depends what state you are in and whether the hotel or company that manages the site is unionized. The differences can be profound. I have also (many years ago) worked in a unionized factory that was too small to have a full-time electrician, so if they needed the smallest thing done, like a fuse changed, they had to call a unionized electrical contractor in.
Unions are insanity. If the odious EFCA is passed, look for the Chinese stock market to boom.
McCormick Place in Chicago is one of the worst...
May 15, 2009 - 11:08 ET by JTPBut not the only place... I get screwed at most of the ones I go to. If you diss them in anyway they choose to make your life miserable for the entire stay there. One thing that overrides union rules everytime though is bribes. They love to take a "donation" to get your needs moved up the waiting list. Pretty honorable bunch of guys.
But I will say this. Not all of them are hardcore. I have met many union members that bust their butts and are aware of what the unions are doing to the companies they work for and do not like it all. There just are not enough of them to make a change.
"Live for yourself...there's no one else more worth living for.
Begging hands and bleeding hearts will only cry out for more"- Rush--Anthem
Javitts in NY beats McCormick, in my experience
May 15, 2009 - 12:19 ET by WhoIsJohnGaltFifteen years ago, when large computer monitors were unGodly expensive, we closed out booth down and had it crated up (yes, by union extortionists), since NY was my town, I was responsible for making sure our crates got on the truck. We had two, forty-something inch monitors that the union guys had been eyeing during the whole show. After we closed, I had to sit ON TOP OF THAT CRATE for two days until our truck arrived to get them, otherwise it would have walked away. It was NOT my imagination. They were constantly walking by to see if I was still there...
Some other vendor had pissed off the union and his booth never got set up. I can also concur about plugging anything in, or hanging a curtain, or any other minor task-gotta be union, gotta wait hours/days. And they defend that practice using "safety" as a reason.
Thieves. Thugs.
My Union Story
May 15, 2009 - 14:37 ET by ReaganFanI know this thread is a little off topic, but I thought I'd share my union story. I was actually in a union once. I was 15 years old (22 years ago) and I worked at Kroger's. We had a shop steward and everything. What was truly strange was this was in NC which not a really union friendly state.
Anyway, I was working 20 hours per week--making $3.35/hr. My pay checks were usually between $40 and $50 per week after taxes. A couple of months into the job, I get a check that is about $38. Can you imagine that amount of money for 20 hours worth of work? I immediately went to the person that did the payroll and asked why there was an extra $10 taken out. I was informed that it was my union dues.
I was pissed off because I had never chose to join the union. I didn't recall authorizing anything. So, I ring up the our local union rep and tell him my story and ask to be taken out of the union. He explained that he could not do that, but that I should stay in the union because they could get me a pay increase. Being 15 and a little naive, I decided to wait and see what kind of raise I would get. About a month later, I did get the raise requested by the union. It was for 5 cents per hour. That would bring me home an extra $1 per week.
I then realized what kind of racket this really was. I called the union and demanded to be removed. The union told me that I could not get out until my renewal date. Since I never knew that I joined, I had no clue to as to what the renewal date was. Of course this was probably BS, but I was just 15. I asked the union for my renewal date and they told me that they could not tell it to me, that I should just know. I probably wasted 10 hours trying to get out.
I got fed up with all the nonsense and had a friend call them up acting like he was a lawyer. He threatened to sue and the very next day I was faxed a letter showing that I was removed from the union.
Here's the funny part. I was a very good employee. After I got out of the union, I went to my boss and asked for a raise. I told him that if I didn't get one, that I would find a better paying job somewhere else. I got an extra dollar per hour ($4.40). So much for the union.
As a side note, all Kroger's in NC shut down, largely because of union issues. One store in Greensboro went on strike and it never opened again. The only other union story that I can remember in NC was that of Cannon Mills, the textile manufacturer. They were a big union company. The union was constantly on strike with ever greater demands. In their last negotation with the union, Cannon decided to go out of business instead of meeting the union demands. They didn't move overseas or file bankruptcy--they just shut the doors and fired several thousand people.
I love unions.
May 15, 2009 - 15:47 ET by Willis_Leon_JohnsonThe oil refinery workers went on strike in the early 80's, and they were out for 6 months, maybe longer, I was a bystander crossing their picket lines.
Anyway, eventually it was all settled and they went back to work.
My first question, "So, when is the breakeven date?", as in, how long does it take to make up the lost wages, etc.
"We will never break even because the union settled for less than we had before."
I had a lot more respect for Sinclair Oil after that.
http://gjresult.com
Memories
May 15, 2009 - 18:54 ET by stratmanWLJ:
My brother was BP middle management during the 80's refinery strike. He was sent to Toledo where he grilled thousands of steaks and other tasty vittles during 12 hour shifts, 7 days a week, for about 3 months before he got his first one day off. The food was tremendous but the workday was long, dangerous (especially considering management was doing the work), dirty and lonely (being away from family).
There were some problems of violence at other refineries, little considering the numbers and the rough-type guys involved, but not at the Toledo one. Probably one of the reasons was that management decided to feed the strikers outside the fence. The boss reasoned that one day those guys would be back working for the company, so why tick them off more - they are our guys too.
BTW, the money was very good, double or triple their usual office wage. My brother came home and bought a new sports car with cash. Except for a buddy that bought a new Harley with cash on a spur of the moment decision, I have not seen paid in full with cash up front new auto purchases again.
Then again, I'm not a car salesman or wealthy.
Unions and other leftist thugs
May 15, 2009 - 11:32 ET by grumpyoldbThe unions served a very good purpose back in the days when big businesses operated company towns and the more you worked the further into debt to the company you got. BUT those days are over. The unions now are nothing but social leaches that bleed companies dry because of demands that they make on companies. Maytag was a perfect example. the unions were so entrenched there that when Maytag was bought out by Whirlpool, the company could not afford to keep the plant open. Unions blackmailed the company into NOT modernizing the plant so the company could remain competitive, as well as demanding an artificially high wage for workers. The cry of the Union as of late has all been "gimmie gimmie gimmie, and I don't care if the company can survive or not". this is a major contributor to the downfall of American Manufacturing. Once I was a Union member, and had to go on strike. We were out for 2 weeks, and got a whole 10cents..... Big deal. The first thing we need to do, if we want American Manufacturing to make a comeback and become the world standard again, is get rid of the unions....
This union guy reveals the
May 15, 2009 - 12:37 ET by Chris NormanThis union guy reveals the childish nature behind all of the socialist class envy out ther:
- The assumption that as long as one doesn't have to directly pay for it, then it's "free".
- That there are no consequences to going out to the "ol' money tree"
- That the federal government is some kind of "Daddy" with bottomless pockets, who takes care of all of "his" little whining children.
The "Mainstream" Media: By liberals. For liberals.
DANGER! Danger!
May 15, 2009 - 17:22 ET by wizardjrCute and bright... how can you not be attracted to this lady? With any luck, one of us could be her love slave. I immediately put my name on the list.
;-))
Maria Bartiromo will be the next target of the statist lefties
May 15, 2009 - 17:29 ET by R D HelmSantelli and Cramer are going to have company by Monday.
LOL-Lucky ba$tards. :-)
-Dave
America has gone totally insane
The American dream?
May 15, 2009 - 20:07 ET by big.league.sliderI live in California, and on Tuesday we will have a statewide special election on Propositions 1A thru 1F. On paper, these propositions are about taking away power from the voters, with regards to increasing taxes and spending, and turning it over to state bureaucrats. In reality, what this special election truly is about, is a referendum on whether Californians want to keep the American dream alive, or whether they want more of Obama's big government welfare state and Colin Powell's higher taxes.
So far, the polls show the American dream is still very much alive and well. Even in liberal California. So Ms. Bartiromo can rest easy.
"Fascism is rightly seen as the merger of the Corporation and Government." -B. Mussolini
I was in a union 30 yrs ago
May 15, 2009 - 20:11 ET by Paul GI was a senior in high school and was a stocker in a grocery store. I made $13 an hour. I remember asking my dad "why isn't everyone in a union?'. He tried to explain to me, but I was young and dumb. While I was buying premeium gas, he was still buying ethyl. And remember this was in the late 70's. lol