| "Yeah so what? " What this means is that using Unions, arbitrary employees can possibly take over companies and consume all of the surpluses, which is not good. "Now, you know what's stupid? Letting the government become the union of last resort via the minimum wage. " It seems odd because a 'min. wage' is a broad, crude measure, and a 'negotiation' feels more market oriented. The problem is, those negotiations are not market oriented. Union-Company negotiations are based on a very arbitrary power that we give to Unions to basically hold the operations of the company hostage unless certain demands are met. It's not efficient at all. Given that, I think it's just better if government sets a floor for work. They could improve it by 1) using economic measures instead of making it political, and 2) possibly have different min wages for different sectors. In reality - we don't need Unions. Where they are 'most needed' today is where pay is really how, and or there are some unfair practices, arguably at Wallmart and Amazon. If we increased minimum wage to something reasonable, and got a bit more nuanced with regulation and enforcement ... then that would solve most of the problem. Worker safety + regulations take care of most of the reasons unions needed to exist and min wage takes care of most of the rest. Non-unionized auto workers make well above min-wage salary because market-driven salaries work well enough in those areas. |