On my way to work today, I listened to the local talk radio show. The morning host was interviewing - not by choice - a person in favor of a state amendment to raise the minimum wage, and another in favor of gambling as a valid way to raise education funds. The supporting arguments revolved around "we have no other choice" (school education funding through gambling) to "all people deserve to make a living wage" (minimum wage).
Excuse me? Moral issues aside, why are these being pushed as "big wins" for the state? What happened to attracting business by becoming a business-friendly state? What happened to raising people's skills so they don't need to take minimum wage jobs?
Also, why are we cow-towing to unions when they are trying to prop up a 1950's manufacturing model of employment? Instead of griping about losing manufacturing jobs to overseas companies, unions (not the government) should risk becoming irrelevant and work to truly upgrade their members' skillsets.
Don't worry, China and 3rd world countries will be clamoring to unionize in the next several years anyway (if not already), and they'll have the same wage problems that we have now. Let 'em have them. We should be smart enough to be beyond them by now. Oops, I forgot: politicians, not governors, run the country.
9 comments:
Are we losing jobs to overseas because employees don't have the skills, or because the employees (through the union) demand high wages, full health care and other benefits, and a hefty pension?
It's my understanding that most people who work for a living don't make minimum wage. But if minimum wage goes up, their salary will go up as well if they make minimum wage + X. But everybody thinks they deserve big money for whatever they do, even if it's something my seven-year-old could do as well or better.
The whole school model is insane. There are still enough stupid people that think that schools just need more money, though, that solutions are difficult. Actually, there are just a lot of stupid people out there, who are too lazy to think and to give their children a good education.
Bitter? Why, yes, how did you know?
Barb,
It's a cultural and business issue.
First, we have learned, as a society, to disdain the low-paying jobs. Hence, we don't want to be seen doing them. The immigrants aren't worried about that.
Second, business needs to make a profit. They do that by increasing revenue and lowering costs. When other country's workers start organizing, though, all bets are off. Then, it's bye bye Wal-Mart.
I agree with you. The only way to keep 'jobs' out here in the US is to keep upgrading skills and the types of jobs. If the US is indeed technically advanced, one can surely expect its labor to be equally technically ahead compared to its counterparts in developing countries.
Unions *are* irrelevant. They just have such a good grip that they can't be removed. Too much of the membership believes the lie, and the leadership enjoys living off the raping of thier "brothers'" paychecks.
Too bad nobody explains common sense economics to them. Raise the minimum wage and you have raised the bottom line expeditures for business. Therefore, the cost to the consumer goes up, and POOF! There goes your "living wage." Folks like me, exempt, salaried folks, will NOT see a raise that equals minimum wage plus whatever. We'll just see our cost of living go up. Again. Without sufficient compensation. Again.
Lets face it: Ohio is a stain. A stain of a once grand state. Thanks to the two-headed single political party, it is now ruined. The schools are crap, the industrial and business "atmosphere" is crap. Nobody wants to stay here. Soon we may be looking at an entire state that looks like Detroit. A ghost town. A ghetto state.
As for Issue 3 and gambling, I think I'm gonna vote yes. Why? Because my libertarian leanings are screaming at me that it should be up to the individual. Also, it would indeed bring jobs. A lot of them would be jobs "only immigrants would do;" hotel cleaning staff, bell hops, etc, but they would also need managerial staff, IT staff, security, and more. It would bring SOME kind of business to the state!
Is it a good way to fund schools? Heck no. That's a smoke screen, just like every other cover for every other issue!
Unfortunately, there is no third party candidate for anything in Ohio this year. That's one reason why I think about doing it! Put that other option out there.
Barb mentioned stupid lazy people. That about sums it up, and it doesn't only apply to education. It is across the board.
Bread and Circuses.
as for the Chinese workforce unionizing...
I'll not be holding my breath. The Chinese gov't makes billions of dollars just the way it is. They are not going to let some silly union idea ruin that.
Yoda: yep, the most advanced country in the world should have the most advanced work force. So...
Scott: shame on us (not us commenting on this issue, but the U.S.) for our collective ignorance and laziness. Unions are relevant as long as they get media coverage, whether they actually do anything positively for their fee-based "friends" or not. I'm not ready to throw Ohio down the toilet...yet.
One of the independents running here wants to legalize gambling for education too. Our schools are a mess. We actually have to change the way we give money to the schools because the supreme court said it was illegal.
Marge (MyUtopia),
I understand the OH Supreme Court has shot down our property tax methods of funding education three times as unconstitutional. So, what are we doing? The same old thing.
Grumble.
I think Barb hit the nail on the head!
Post a Comment