Boris Badenov
Fortis Leader
A maybe more interesting question is why anyone needs to ask what the purpose of unions is. This isn't art, it's science. If you're able to memorize the answers to the ATP written, there's little doubt but that you're able to understand the ultimate purpose of a Union. What I find confusing is when people posit that it's like a gang and then expect everyone to be agog at this amazing analysis. Of course it's like a gang. It's not just like one, that's what it is. The question is is the gang necessary. In a real free market, it would be a method of organized crime.
As it stands, though, a union is a (mostly failed) way of keeping some sort of order to the Herd as it is picked off nonchalantly by entrenched capital interests. Fair? I suppose, such as it is. Better than the alternative? Without question. In some magical (formerly believable) world where the so-called "free market" were actually free? A union would be a strongarm tactic. As it stands now? It's a method for skilled labor to maintain some semblance of predictability in their lives of indentured servitude.
Those who pillory unionism as a remnant of a bygone era miss the point entirely. The Founding Fathers were violently opposed to entrenched Interests, that was the whole F'ing point of the thing. Now we're reduced to arguing about whether a cartel of workers is more or less virtuous than a cartel of moneyed interests. If there were a free market, there would be no entrenched Interests, no cartels, but as it stands now, it's only fair for the wage-slaves to have a semi-effective Interest of their own. Does it breed corruption and class-warfare? Of course it does. But, at the risk of being a 5 year old, we didn't start it. I look forward to a day when then United States remembers the document called the "Constitution" and abandons battles between the interests of the rich and the interests of the charismatic, but simply returns to a natural economy. In the meantime? I'll vote Union, and you've any sense beyond your own immediate wellbeing, you will too. It's all fun and games until you're 50 and laid off from your 5th airline job because of "economic necessity".
As it stands, though, a union is a (mostly failed) way of keeping some sort of order to the Herd as it is picked off nonchalantly by entrenched capital interests. Fair? I suppose, such as it is. Better than the alternative? Without question. In some magical (formerly believable) world where the so-called "free market" were actually free? A union would be a strongarm tactic. As it stands now? It's a method for skilled labor to maintain some semblance of predictability in their lives of indentured servitude.
Those who pillory unionism as a remnant of a bygone era miss the point entirely. The Founding Fathers were violently opposed to entrenched Interests, that was the whole F'ing point of the thing. Now we're reduced to arguing about whether a cartel of workers is more or less virtuous than a cartel of moneyed interests. If there were a free market, there would be no entrenched Interests, no cartels, but as it stands now, it's only fair for the wage-slaves to have a semi-effective Interest of their own. Does it breed corruption and class-warfare? Of course it does. But, at the risk of being a 5 year old, we didn't start it. I look forward to a day when then United States remembers the document called the "Constitution" and abandons battles between the interests of the rich and the interests of the charismatic, but simply returns to a natural economy. In the meantime? I'll vote Union, and you've any sense beyond your own immediate wellbeing, you will too. It's all fun and games until you're 50 and laid off from your 5th airline job because of "economic necessity".
