Nobel prize winning economist Gary Becker on why Obama's policies are extending the recession

Forum Index » Political Discussion
[Post New]08/31/2010 10:39
Anonymous
http://www.becker-posner-blog.com/2010/08/unions-and-the-obama-administrationbecker.html


The real threat to a robust recovery on the labor side has come from employer and entrepreneurial fears that once the economic environment improves, a Democratic Congress and administration will pass pro-union and other pro-worker legislation that will raise the cost of doing business and cut profits. In this way the obvious pro-union-pro-worker bias of the present government has contributed to a slower recovery, especially in labor markets. This helps explain the depressingly slow decline in unemployment rates and in the number of workers who have given up looking for jobs.
[Post New]08/31/2010 10:49
Anonymous
This is ludicrous. Unable to point to anything that Obama has actually done to extend the recession caused by Bush's policies, the right are now trying to blame things that he might do in the future for the unemployment rate.

This is plain dumb.
[Post New]08/31/2010 12:20
Anonymous
http://www.commentarymagazine.com/viewarticle.cfm/the-failure-of-the-liberal-economic-experiment--15500

Here's answer to your question that you can't point to anything that Obama has done that is hurting the economy. Article regarding the analysis of increased government spending and the GDP.
[Post New]08/31/2010 13:09
Anonymous
He's not going to unionize anything. Take your anxiety pills.
[Post New]08/31/2010 13:24
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:He's not going to unionize anything. Take your anxiety pills.


Unions are good for the poor working class because it gives them decent wages and benefits. All businesses, law firms, hospitals, mom & pop shops, day care centers, nannies, teachers, barbers, auto mechanics, etc., should have a union to represent employees and Right to Work laws in VA and other states should be abolished. states should This is the one thing I would love to see Obama create.
[Post New]08/31/2010 14:24
stpickrell
Member Offline
Weren't we more business-friendly in the early 2000s?

Why didn't this reap a bonanza of jobs?

As for uncertainty, give me a break. In 1992, we had the Euro being created, we had the fall of the Soviet Union, we had the Japanese real estate bubble collapsing, we had the ADA being passed, we had FMLA being passed, we had the Clear Air Act getting strengthened ... sounds like there was plenty of uncertainty then too. Except I imagine businesses were sitting on a spare couple of trillion of cash.

Basically, I think we'll just take turns with the elephants and donkeys until China and India emerge in the forefront and we're all even enough in terms of wages and standards of living. Or maybe someone will figure out how to turn nanotech, biotech, or green energy into something like the PC boom. Then we'll all be living large and hopefully bought the nanotech equivalent of Microsoft in 2020.

Or maybe the Mayas were right ...
[Post New]08/31/2010 15:51
Anonymous
13:24

those unions were just great for the car companies? and for those city governments that have all those unfunded pensions?
[Post New]08/31/2010 16:22
Anonymous
Nobel Prize winning President says "bite me".
[Post New]08/31/2010 16:43
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:Unions are good for the poor working class because it gives them decent wages and benefits. All businesses, law firms, hospitals, mom & pop shops, day care centers, nannies, teachers, barbers, auto mechanics, etc., should have a union to represent employees and Right to Work laws in VA and other states should be abolished. states should This is the one thing I would love to see Obama create.


Do you also believe in unicorns????

Do you seriously think that is how unions operate today. These are not your father's and grandfather's unions. The officers make $150 - $350K - much more than the folks they represent. They are a business and their business is collecting dues.

Or, you could just ask Eddie York how great they are for the working class. Eddie was shot and killed by union members for crossing a picket line in order to work to feed his family.
[Post New]08/31/2010 21:57
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Unions are good for the poor working class because it gives them decent wages and benefits. All businesses, law firms, hospitals, mom & pop shops, day care centers, nannies, teachers, barbers, auto mechanics, etc., should have a union to represent employees and Right to Work laws in VA and other states should be abolished. states should This is the one thing I would love to see Obama create.


Do you also believe in unicorns????

Do you seriously think that is how unions operate today. These are not your father's and grandfather's unions. The officers make $150 - $350K - much more than the folks they represent. They are a business and their business is collecting dues.

Or, you could just ask Eddie York how great they are for the working class. Eddie was shot and killed by union members for crossing a picket line in order to work to feed his family.


I agree with you that unions are not always what they were in the past.

But you can't possibly win an argument about which side has done more violence to workers. It's not even close.
[Post New]09/01/2010 07:30
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Unions are good for the poor working class because it gives them decent wages and benefits. All businesses, law firms, hospitals, mom & pop shops, day care centers, nannies, teachers, barbers, auto mechanics, etc., should have a union to represent employees and Right to Work laws in VA and other states should be abolished. states should This is the one thing I would love to see Obama create.


Do you also believe in unicorns????

Do you seriously think that is how unions operate today. These are not your father's and grandfather's unions. The officers make $150 - $350K - much more than the folks they represent. They are a business and their business is collecting dues.

Or, you could just ask Eddie York how great they are for the working class. Eddie was shot and killed by union members for crossing a picket line in order to work to feed his family.


I agree with you that unions are not always what they were in the past.

But you can't possibly win an argument about which side has done more violence to workers. It's not even close.


What about the violence they do to their wives? Oh never mind -- they get acquitted -- I forgot.
[Post New]09/01/2010 08:57
Anonymous
What are you talking about? You do realize that unions are 45% female, and that some unions are mostly female. Female union organizing goes back to Susan B. Anthony.
[Post New]09/01/2010 09:01
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:What are you talking about? You do realize that unions are 45% female, and that some unions are mostly female. Female union organizing goes back to Susan B. Anthony.


No PP, she did not know that bit of information prior to her ridiculous posting. At this time she is probably googling Susan B. Anthony.
[Post New]09/01/2010 10:15
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
I agree with you that unions are not always what they were in the past.

But you can't possibly win an argument about which side has done more violence to workers. It's not even close.


No doubt about it - but that is not what I am arguing. The PP poster was making a case for why unions are good for the "working poor class" and that is what I am rebutting.
[Post New]09/01/2010 14:54
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
I agree with you that unions are not always what they were in the past.

But you can't possibly win an argument about which side has done more violence to workers. It's not even close.


No doubt about it - but that is not what I am arguing. The PP poster was making a case for why unions are good for the "working poor class" and that is what I am rebutting.


I was rebutting a person who mentioned Eddie York. If that was you, then I don't understand why you brought that up.
Forum Index » Political Discussion
Go to: 

Search   Recent Topics   Hottest Topics