There will be blood!

[Strings]

I was the first non union employee of a union company.

The owner had bought out the Milwaukee office of Assist (data and electrical contractor), and opened his own business. Since Assist had been union, he stayed with the union in Milwaukee.

I was given the option, and chose not to. That set the trend for the Oshkosh office, which went entirely non-union.

Roughly a year later, we had a chance to work with the boys from Milwaukee. They kept calling us scabs, telling us about how we were getting screwed, how the boss was ripping us off. I finally asked their team lead (highest ranked guy out of their office) what his take home pay was: it was a bit shy of what mine was.

I was just an installation tech. He was in charge of all Milwaukee.

We had the same benefits, which the boss had set up without any arm twisting from the union. Point of fact, when we got insurance, we all got a raise to cover what insurance was gonna cost us.

The big difference was his union dues. So... what did those dues get him?

When the owner finally got tired of the lack of work and initiative out of the Milwaukee office, he shut it down. THEN, the union started making noise, threatening our other employees, and generally making a nuisance of itself. Which resulted in... nothing. And there was no help for the guys that had just lost their jobs: "Sorry you're unemployed now. If you get another job, make sure they're in the union!"

Seriously: most of the pro-union people I've met have come across as Jonestown types: don't confuse them with facts, they have their rhetoric, and that's all that matters!

[brimic]

AG's metaphor is great--as far as it goes. 

But it posits a rational system and economics is not a rational system.  Cultures are driven by irrational motives and operate, when they can or need to, outside rationality.  What do you think explains the fact that most "economics" in long-ago times (and sometimes not long ago) were based not on
The Invisible Hand but rather The Iron Fist indulging in war, rapine, and slavery to aggregate its "economy?"

To answer your question: Whenever there is a fair transaction between two people, both profit. The first a time a third festering  boil  who was completely worthless for anything else weaseled (taxed, sued, defrauded, etc) from, or outright robbed the original two of their profit and it went unanswered by swift and violent retaliation, the free market slowly started to die.

[brimic]

Seriously: most of the pro-union people I've met have come across as Jonestown types: don't confuse them with facts, they have their rhetoric, and that's all that matters!

I really feel bad for anyone stuck in a union job because they had few other options.
I worked in a factory after college for a few years until something in my field opened up. It was a closed shop, so I had to join the union. I was kind of lucky because I was paired up with a middle aged temporarily-out-of-work-accountant at my work station and we got along great.

My dad at least tells me some good stories once in awhile...
A few years back, a Union President came into his press shop to hand out watches to 3 guys (one being my dad) who had 30 years in.
The first told the president to go ahead and jam the watch somewhere.
The second dropped the watch on the floor and crunched it under his boot.
My Dad said he decided to keep his as it was a $20,000 watch if the union did nothing else useful for him during his time there.

[longeyes]

To answer your question: Whenever there is a fair transaction between two people, both profit. The first a time a third festering  boil  who was completely worthless for anything else weaseled (taxed, sued, defrauded, etc) from, or outright robbed the original two of their profit and it went unanswered by swift and violent retaliation, the free market slowly started to die.

Well, yeah, but who desires a "fair transaction?"  That implies a set of moral virtues and honorable behavior that exist more in the breach than in the observance (thanks, Will).  Adam Smith knew that capitalism required a moral foundation--and he wrote about that--and our Founders knew that a Republic required a virtuous people.  We've had a hell of a run.

[brimic]

Well, yeah, but who desires a "fair transaction?"  That implies a set of moral virtues and honorable behavior that exist more in the breach than in the observance (thanks, Will).  Adam Smith knew that capitalism required a moral foundation--and he wrote about that--and our Founders knew that a Republic required a virtuous people.  We've had a hell of a run.

There are a lot of people who would work hard to produce something of quality to enjoy a fair transaction- morality or not, the gain from the transaction is enough to encourage future fair transactions
The problem comes in when even a small sliver of society are cheats or have no desire to produce a useful item or service and enter the mix (lets call them what they are: politicians, community organizers, ambulance chasers, 3-card monty dealers, welfare queens, and thieves)  , their numbers can only grow at the expense of the productive.
Right now, the cross section of people willing to take part in a fair deal is in the minority.

[ArfinGreebly]

There are a lot of people who would work hard to produce something of quality to enjoy a fair transaction- morality or not, the gain from the transaction is enough to encourage future fair transactions

The problem comes in when even a small sliver of society are cheats or have no desire to produce a useful item or service and enter the mix, their numbers can only grow at the expense of the productive.

Right now, the cross section of people willing to take part in a fair deal is in the minority.

Or so we're being told.

I do believe there is a not-insignificant number of "fair deal" proponents suffering from some degree of apathy, seeing all avenues to righteous prosperity blocked.

Oh, just a note, the word "majority" in Russia-speak is "Bolshevik."  The word for "minority" is "Menshevik."  The terms were a form of labeling propaganda.  The Bolsheviks were not numerically the majority.

There's a crowd running around the country at the moment trying to convince us that they're the "99 percent."  They are, according to them, the "majority."  And therefore they have some kind of moral high ground.

And it's easy -- if you have no alternative source of data -- to become apathetic and ineffective if you believe you're overwhelmingly outnumbered.

[slingshot]

I had to join a union at one place I worked.  I was young and didn't question it.  Now I would.

I don't think the RTW deal is going to make much difference to unions in the short term.  Longer term may be different.

As far as I know the RTW law as signed today.  Guess I'll wait to see if there is any blood.

[ArfinGreebly]

RTW is seen as a threat to federal money laundering.

"Stimulus" dollars get diverted to union pensions and such, unions are bolstered thereby, union employees who are then not laid off continue to pay dues.  Dues are funneled into lefty political efforts.

RTW threatens to interrupt that sweetheart deal.

[slingshot]

The term "scab" may take on a different meaning in MI, especially in businesses that employ both union and non-union employees doing the same job.