Question: Is There Any Greater Destroyer Of "Union Jobs" Than Progressive Confiscatory/Regulatory Policies?

As hard as it is for me to understand how anyone can look at the present fate of Flint Michigan, etc and still promote the narrative that those who left the forces that are now in power "all to themselves" are the reason for the collapse of the region - I vow to continue publishing my small doses of reality to counter these claims.

You probably do not have the Flash Player (Get Adobe Flash Player Here) installed for your browser or the video files are misplaced on your server!

The line of thinking in the above video is stunning. 
They are arguing that:

• GM's continued presence had people using their physical labor instead of "their minds" to make a living
• When GM left for Mexico (and the South) it caused a large group of people who had not diversified their skills in peril

Let's flip this around:

1. The build up of GM and other "consumers of labor" turned what was once timberland into a thriving urban center
2. As the industrial producers needed labor to man their production processes - it "consumed more labor" and paid them for this task
3. From this flow of money - the city's economic fortunes flourised
4. As market conditions became unfavorable for GM - they were required to reduce their cost of production.  They chose to not upgrade their present capital base in Flint, instead choosing to build new plants in Mexico and the Southern "Right To Work" states
5. Despite these changes GM, and Chrysler filed for bankruptcy and Ford avoided doing so by a hair because they sent to their employee unions earlier than these other two and got concessions. (Ford - How We Avoided Bankruptcy)

Here is a Google search on "Municipal Layoffs".
From this long list of examples we CANNOT say "The present Anti-Union" movement is the cause of the loss of "union jobs".  (Note - not all of these municipal workers belong to a union).
How does anyone make note of these crushing layoffs due to eroded government treasuries and still conclude that the so called "Anti-Union Movement" is the biggest threat to UNION JOBS?

THE BIGGEST THREAT TO UNION JOBS IS MASSIVE FISCAL IMBALANCE!!!!

Of course, my friends over at "Jack & Jill Politics" are working overtime to compared "Anti-Union" sentiments with "the Confederate South".


It goes without saying that "Pro-Union" DOES NOT equal "Pro-Jobs". We only need to do a tour of the "Mission Accomplished Cities" to bear this fact out.

I wonder if all of those "highly evolved" Northerners that are exiting the "Union States" realize the peril of them moving into the "Neo-Confederate States" because of the greater opportunity that is present down here in the South?   Why is it that those who tell us of "The Southern Strategy" from the early 1970's are loathed to talk about how well the "Urban Strategy" worked for our people?

Moving From The Transactional "Malcolm X Football Game" Into The Big Picture

(Note - this diagram does not encapsulate all of the flows of value between the forces that are represented.  Only the key points to make the case.)

The bottom line is:  A "Government Union" is a citizen.  Unlike an employee from a company - a Government employee receives his compensation from the government treasury.  A union employee employed at a public or private company receives their compensation from the corporate treasury.

The fate of a both of these groups of worker is a function of the fiscal solvency of the "treasury" from which they draw their salaries.

It comes at no surprise that a person who is in favor of "Progressive Taxation" would also seek to maximize the wage and compensation package for the government union member - just as they do with the corporate labor union.  When "the wealthy" or "corporations" are the ones who take the hit from the pay spike - it is easy to support your comrades.

I have observed over time that the worst case scenario for those who support increased pay for union workers is with the transit workers union.  Every dollar of increase in their salary means higher transit fares for "the working poor".  In the case of this confluence the "community activist" mandates that a third party rain funds upon the situation - thus allowing both contending parties to avoid taking the hit.

It is stunning to see people who have lived through the massive job losses in eroding cities who no longer have a tax base that can sustain their level of workers - not try to look past this history of painful truth about GOVERNMENT SOLVENCY and instead try to make the issue in Wisconsin their "Remember The Alamo" moment as they seek to fight back under the guise of "Protecting The Union".

I do personally think that the governor of WI should back off, for now. GO forward with the cuts and the increases in contributions for the workers. The plan to alter the collective bargaining rights are beyond what is needed at this immediate time. I do agree, however, that the governor has made a good case as he details how certain obstructionist actions by the labor unions cost the state money.

The "Union Consciousness" is heard in this segment of "Brick City".  The SEIU representative refers to how the people of Newark need the GOVERNMENT JOBS in order to maintain their lifestyle.  Thus, he argues that by cutting the jobs the city government will imperil the people who are laid off.

You probably do not have the Flash Player (Get Adobe Flash Player Here) installed for your browser or the video files are misplaced on your server!

JOBS:

1. Board Of Education
2. Public Housing Authority
3. City Of Newark Municipal Government

With these JOBS the workers were able to maintain their standard of living.

Isn't this the same consciousness that we saw in the city of Washington DC where the school chancellor that had fired teachers due to low performance - to the detriment of the Black students within - was actually seen CREATING HARDSHIP for those who needed a job?

With all due respect this is an irrational way of thinking about the situation.  The more accurate statement is that the PRESENCE OF A TAX BASE provides a platform by which the collection of people within the city to purchase MUNICIPAL SERVICES at a certain quantity, thus translating into a certain STANDARD OF LIVING for the municipality.   In short - these government workers are a function of the broader economy within the city.  As the "water level goes down" the government must make painful decisions or they will further imperil the city's finances by attempting to live beyond their means.