I agree with what you say except for the unions. The end result of the union agenda is to divide the country into two halves – unions (govt employees, service workers, licensed professionals) and non-unions workforce. Look for two sets of benefits.
———————–
This is part of the brainwashing!!!
Workers should NOT be divided at all! That’s exactly what has caused the demise of the once-proud, exceedingly innovative and productive U.S. worker — and the resultant middle-class.
Instead of tearing down the unions, we should be working on bringing all workers into the unions. We should strive to work UP to those wages and benefits for all workers, not tear them down.
FWIW, the private sector employees absolutely BENEFIT from unions because their employers have to compete with the union employers. The private sector workers should be demanding more, or they should be working for the public sector. It creates more competition/demand for workers, improving EVERYONE’s circumstances.
If it’s so much better in the public sector, wouldn’t it be filled with all our best and brightest employees?
BTW, I agree with you to a point about the seniority protections in unionized workplaces. While it does serve a purpose (helps avoid age discrimination and favoritism), it should be secondary to aptitude/ability. In reality, this really isn’t an issue unless you are staying in one particular position. Oftentimes, it is the younger people who move up the ladder more quickly if they are ambitious.
Also, I think the demise of the U.S. auto industry is more due to mismanagement then union pensions, etc.
If they had done a better job in development — and improved their quality and efficiency — the unions would not be an issue, IMHO. Their experiment with poorer quality cars (to increase turnover) during the 80s was their death knell.
