Biden claims he's very pro union from the podium, but wants to force a deal to prevent rail strike.

[Twilight Hue]

Biden urges Congress to pass legislation to avert nationwide rail strike

?

 

[PureX]

I think it's weird that you don't see the obvious reason for the conflicted view, here.

I'm very pro union, but I would also hope we avoid a rail strike, as it would be very bad for the economy.

Since you seem to feel this contradiction is him being two-faced, which of those options do you choose? Screw the rail workers, or screw the economy?

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

I think it's weird that you don't see the obvious reason for the conflicted view, here.

I'm very pro union, but I would also hope we avoid a rail strike, as it would be very bad for the economy.

Since you seem to feel this contradiction is him being two-faced, which of those options do you choose? Screw the rail workers, or screw the economy?

In the Danish model unions are a positive part of the law, they are even protected with certain limited rights, but also duties. The same for the employers and the same for the government. It is in effect a 3 part system, where no one part is always the boss of the 2 others and all 3 try to make compromises.

 

[Brickjectivity]

In the Danish model unions are a positive part of the law, they are even protected with certain limited rights, but also duties. The same for the employers and the same for the government. It is in effect a 3 part system, where no one part is always the boss of the 2 others and all 3 try to make compromises.

Unions currently have a very tough time here in the 'States. Many of our states are 'Right to work' states. A right-to-work state does not allow unions to strike against non-union hires, so they cannot write a contract requiring that the company hire only union workers. This makes the unions very weak in USA, because workers don't have to join the union, don't have to participate in strikes and don't have to pay union dues to obtain the benefits that the union provides.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Unions currently have a very tough time here in the 'States. Many of our states are 'Right to work' states. A right-to-work state does not allow unions to strike against non-union hires, so they cannot write a contract requiring that the company hire only union workers. This makes the unions very weak in USA, because workers don't have to join the union, don't have to participate in strikes and don't have to pay union dues to obtain the benefits that the union provides.

Yeah, but this is not North American politics.
So in the Danish tradition belongs not to the unions, but the government.

 

[Twilight Hue]

I think it's weird that you don't see the obvious reason for the conflicted view, here.

I'm very pro union, but I would also hope we avoid a rail strike, as it would be very bad for the economy.

Since you seem to feel this contradiction is him being two-faced, which of those options do you choose? Screw the rail workers, or screw the economy?

I'd let the market decide. If a company is poorly run, let it implode then let the competition take over the lead.

That's why we have essentially monopolies that are deemed "to big to fail". That should end soonest and end the dependency on huge mega corporations that dictate and influence political policy.

Of course the railroad has been a juggernaut from the start.

 

[PureX]

I'd let the market decide. If a company is poorly run, then let the competition take over. That's why we have essentially monopolies that are deemed "to big to fail". That should end soonest.

Do you understand how railroads work, physically? There is very little "competition" involved. They are how we move large amounts of freight over long distances. Trucking is how we deliver that freight point to point. Ships are how we move it across oceans. These all have to be operating to maintain the supply chain.

If railroad "X" decides to cheap it's employees, and the employees have to strike, quit, or go broke, the whole supply chain is effected. There are no "other railroads" to take on the task.

So now what? Let the railroads drive their employees into poverty by forcing them to keep working for peanuts, to save the supply chain? Or let the employees strike and disrupt the whole supply chain to get better wages? Or force the railroad to raise it's wages? (That will NEVER happen in this country.)

 

[Father Heathen]

It's a shame that these companies would rather **** the whole country than provide their employees with fair pay and conditions.

 

[sun rise]

Do you understand how railroads work, physically? There is very little "competition" involved. They are how we move large amounts of freight over long distances.

Some put ideology over reality.. Others such as Biden, operating in the real world, try to do their best in a very complex situation avoiding ideological extremes and wishful thinking.

 

[metis]

I'm very pro union, but I would also hope we avoid a rail strike, as it would be very bad for the economy.

Ditto.

What some don't seem to grasp is that not everything in real life is black or white.

 

[PureX]

Some put ideology over reality.. Others such as Biden, operating in the real world, try to do their best in a very complex situation avoiding ideological extremes and wishful thinking.

His only hope (Biden), really, is to try and pressure a mutual resolution, which for some weird reason, seems to be what's being objected to. It really does defy all reason!

 

[Twilight Hue]

Do you understand how railroads work, physically? There is very little "competition" involved. They are how we move large amounts of freight over long distances. Trucking is how we deliver that freight point to point. Ships are how we move it across oceans. These all have to be operating to maintain the supply chain.

If railroad "X" decides to cheap it's employees, and the employees have to strike, quit, or go broke, the whole supply chain is effected. There are no "other railroads" to take on the task.

So now what? Let the railroads drive their employees into poverty by forcing them to keep working for peanuts, to save the supply chain? Or let the employees strike and disrupt the whole supply chain to get better wages? Or force the railroad to raise it's wages? (That will NEVER happen in this country.)

Well I'd say better get cracking with it.

Monopolies are illegal in this country anyways. Don't deliver, go under.

 

[Ponder This]

Biden urges Congress to pass legislation to avert nationwide rail strike

?

Sure, Biden sometimes says he is "pro-Union", but no one should actually believe him when he says that.

 

[PureX]

Well I'd say better get cracking with it.

Monopolies are illegal in this country anyways. Don't deliver, go under.

I don't know what country you're living in, but here in the U.S. they're all the rage among the capitalists. And they've gotten so good at creating and maintaining their monopolies that they don't even need to legally consolidate, anymore. The singular goal of their mutual greed has them acting in accord with each other's desires without them ever even having to speak to each other. Let alone risk being caught making illegal arrangements or agreements. Not that anyone is actually policing them in that regard, either.

 

[metis]

Sure, Biden sometimes says he is "pro-Union", but no one should actually believe him when he says that.

Is the above "projection"? Seems so.

When are you going to get it through your head that one simply does not just have to have polar opposites as a choice?

 

[metis]

BTW, the rail companies here have made already $21 billion in the first 3/4's of this year, and Biden and the Dems have a compromise piece of legislation that will provide 7 paid sick days, and it seems that at least some Pubs are on board with that.

But it does appear at least at this point that the Dems care much more about the workers and our economy than most Pubs do. But let's see what happens.