By David Jones at Mar 04, 2011
But isn't all this commentary a bit disingenuous? After all, unions gave up the idea of worker power right after WWII when they agreed with Capital and Government that they were willing to accept the liberal-democratic-capitalist arrangement as long as the pay and benefits remained sweet. Now that Capital backs out , taking investment and jobs overseas, labor has no power to intervene. They have been reduced to putting their energy into Democrats! Their demise is their own fault and it won't be reversed in a couple of weeks of demonstrations for "rights". They should be striking and demonstrating their power.
As for taxing the rich, all well and good, it's certainly been done before; BUT it never lasts very long. Even the welfare states of Europe with their long-time consensus are being dismantled in the name of "austerity". The rich are generous until they decide not to be. Wouldn't it just be better to build a classless society so there are no rich?
Those who suggest Bush-Obama should not have bailed out the banks ( and increased debt) should also admit they were prepared for total collapse of the entire global economic system. In other words chaos from which might have rose democratic revolution or, at least as likely, dystopian violence. Because that is how close to the precipice capitalism was. I actually was prepared to see that happen but I'm not sure liberal or conservative critics of Obama were.
As for EFCA, the card check provision was bad legislation. Forcing people in the minority to be in unions is bad policy. You should be able to convince people to join of their own free will and happily pay dues because it is good for them. Dues money should not go to political parties or politicians. To save unionism, unions must adapt to the new conditions. Labor justice must be globalized.