[ghostwriter]

They also can, under certain circumstances, collectively demand that the company stops hiring anyone outside the union, and make other unsubstantiated demands such as mandatory membership fees, that benefit the union itself and not high-skilled individual employees who know how to beneficially sell their skills to the employer without third-parties involved. Also, contractors with individual LLCs usually don't sign non-compete agreements, so you don't need a union to be able to benefit from an expertise that is currently in high demand.

[adamsea]

Yes that can occur. Lots of things can and do occur.

If we think unions are bad because they do bad things under certain circumstances then that should also apply to corporations, no? Worker exploitation, ignoring externalities and such?

So, we could get rid of corporations and unions? Or ... have both, since like any human institution, both are fallible.

[ghostwriter]

> Yes that can occur. Lots of things can and do occur.

so, what's your solution to the problem of fallible unions?

> Or ... have both, since like any human institution, both are fallible.

You are yet to prove that unions solve anything in the setting that you outlined.

How about just having corporations and a small government that doesn't prevent new players entering the market by restrictive laws and quotas, in place of those that fall prey to corruption, fraud, and short-sighted destructive practices? There's more than two options to consider.

[adamsea]

Why do you only ask about fallible unions?

Why not fallible corporations?

My point is simple. These are all human institutions. They're not "problems" with "solutions".

And, to answer your second question, I believe the scenario you idealize creates externalities like environmental pollutions which kills citizens, and creates conditions where companies exploit workers (consider what the food industry, meatpacking plants, etc, would look like without OHSA).

[ghostwriter]

> Why do you only ask about fallible unions?

Precisely because you've added a redundant argument of fallible corporations to the thread that makes a case about corrupt unions that negatively impact law-abiding high-skilled professionals. This was the concern I initially raised.

> My point is simple. These are all human institutions. They're not "problems" with "solutions".

I think they are, unless these institutions have no purpose and do not set any goals.

> And, to answer your second question, I believe the scenario you idealize creates externalities like environmental pollutions which kills citizens

For that we've already got a court system that is capable, after a proper due process, of fining and criminally charging everyone who is proven to be guilty. I'm not advocating for dispersing them, I'm advocating for separating state affairs from economics, in the same manner and for the same reason why religion and church was separated from the state in the western world a few centuries ago.

> consider what the food industry, meatpacking plants, etc, would look like without OHSA

what responsibility do OSHA, FDA, SEC, etc inspectors and supervisors carry for regulatory failure? I know what happens to the producers and owners of those plants who fail to provide safe environment and products, or who commited fraud and got caught, I've never heard of government inspectors and commitee members going to jail for any of those cases that led to citizens' harm. At most, and in very rare cases with a lot of public pressure they get permanently banned from holding similar positions in the future.

[adamsea]

> I know what happens to the producers and owners of those plants who fail to provide safe environment and products, or who commited fraud and got caught,

Um it is the government that catches them and punishes them?

I had a difficult time understanding your comment - could you try expressing it another way?