Why would working and middle class people be against unions?

Nothing wrong with a working class mafia
Propaganda and state repression throughout the late 20th century.
The fact that the government felt the need to use violence because workers were unionizing is enough of a reason to join a union.

You guys are litterally doing better than tunisia just because their unions are too powerful and are ruining their economy

Not at all, Tunisians have better living standards, better education and better healthcare.
Here its a laissez faire capitalist shithole, teachers literally get beaten up by riot police for trying to unionize.
The Moroccan population of Marrakech is forced to live outside the city because real estate prices skyrocketed ever since the king allowed foreigners to purchase homes without requiring them to be residents (something forbidden in Tunisia).
Tunisia and Algeria are above us by every HDI and quality of life metrics out there.

Morrocan growth rate, tourism numbers and infrastructure is better than tunisian and algerian infrastructure. You guys just have a terrible countryside problem

No it's not kys

sounds based

sign me up

Because this country has a serious problem with unemployment, and the unions and their party strive to block even the smallest reforms that could make a difference. Moreover they are so used to wielding power in this corporatist system we've created that now they also strike when a government is rightfully using executive power without consulting the unions, and this they try to justify with ad campaigns that are just blatant disinformation.

Fuck those guys.

Why not?

Mindcucked by shekelstien

> trade unions "ruin the economy"
Imagine being this much of a scab. Thatcher and Reagan would be proud of you.

They arent.

Based and redpilled moroccan

Attached: Screenshot_2019-01-07-02-38-27.png (720x1280, 844K)

fpbp
capitalism has made the average folk think he will one day join the ranks of the billionaires, unions would be an obstacle then. too bad only 0.1% will ever be a millionaire

Attached: 1538645645273.jpg (250x166, 4K)

because they're ran by crooks colluding with the employers

Because unions are against the growth and best interests of the very company that employed them to begin with. They shouldn't have voluntarily signed a contract if they didn't agree with the working conditions

Because i don't like to be forced to agree with the collective narrative.
Say my union were on strike for working conditions or whatever, but i don't think the working conditions are bad, i am FORCED to comply with the unionl, i.e can't go to work etc.
Fuck that
I am an adult, i can fight my own fights

>Morrocan growth rate, tourism numbers and infrastructure
This doesn't translate in quality of life: "growth" means more money in the country, not for the actual people, tourism only benefits hotels, restaurants and travel agencies, not their workers, "infrastructure" is only nice when you have the money to use it; don't be fooled by numbers

>Why would working and middle class people be against unions?
Because they know unions can kill entire cities through outrageous demands.

You are either willfully ignoring the conditions of power that corporations (the so called "private sector") have DE FACTO over workers, or merely naïve if you believe most employment contracts are "voluntarily signed". The other option is starving

Because a lot of unions no longer negotiate in good faith. In an ideal world labour and capital would agree on something fair but in our world both demand more than they deserve. The difference is that companies create jobs and unions don't.

Public sector unions are cancer, government benefits are already too much

Private sector unions have their place but they are too political and the bosses get rich off of member dues. German system of cooperation would be much better.

Also this. Forced union membership is dumb

>Here its a laissez faire capitalist shithole, teachers literally get beaten up by riot police for trying to unionize.
That doesn't sound very laissez faire dumbass

>The other option is starving
Not really. they can find work at another workplace where they deem the working conditions more appropiate. Ever heard about competition?

The other option,given that they have savings, is to take the entrepreneurial route, maybe they can learn one or two things about risks and that way realize that profit is not created out of thin air like they seem to believe, and reason why they make outrageous and unrealistic demands

>another workplace
this is really not practical, is it? do you think that someone that NEEDS to sell their work has the time to look for a "better" deal?

>the entrepreneur meme
Do you think that someone who NEEDS to sell their work has the money to and time to start up a "business"?

Please, don't look at the world through ideals, things are how they are

Of course

you are aware that unions create unemployment by forcing companies to increase the the minimum wage for which people can be hired and costs in general, right?

Now you hve way more people getting paid $0 because they don't have a job.

Example: a company has a budget to hire 100 workers. If they unionize the company's opertional costs go up and now they are forced to lay off staff or run a deficit. Let's they need to lay off 30 people in order to Break even, now you have 30 unemployed people who will be forced to look for a new job, with a high probability that they can't find something according to their skills.

Unions are detrimental for economic growth, but yeah are a good argument by socialist and other parasitic groups

Because it is an apparatschik institution where professionnal troublemakers lives off worker's rights

The only solution is anarcho syndicalism but even so there will always be a profession that will be neglected because it will be less useful than another (just like how farmers were treated as shit in USSR)

I wasn't arguing in favor of unions but against the notion that "companies" and would-be workers have the same leverage when arranging contracts.

I agree that unions are mostly full of corruption and are detrimental but just because they show how shitty is to be a worker in the dominant economic system, as you've told, i.e. "companies" are not really supposed (nor is in their best interest) to give their emplyees an acceptable quality of life.

>less useful
the irony is that agriculture is literally the single most important economic activity for humans, it just happens that farmers are easily replaced

Exactly, its the most automatized profession in primary industry

Exacly can't really argue with anything of what you said. Only thing I'll add is that is each person's responsibility to think long term and make the best use of its income in order to improve his quality of life with time

That goes without saying, we are all responsible for ourselves. But I believe it's in the best interest of all society to make sure that selling one's workforce (which is time, which is life) doesn't give you merely scraps, after all most small time criminals wouldn't be so if they had a secure source of income that didn't just get them by. Unions were supposed to do this, but -at least here- they have been co-opted by politicians or cronies, becoming yet another arm of the upper classes to have a pool of easy-access slave labor.

I don’t justify that because it’s way too much. But here in Germany the unions start with a demand and in the end they get about the half of what they demanded. I’m sorry that you had problems because of the strike.

Unions are literally the reason why companies move overseas or hire illegals. They destroy companies and instead of getting payed little the people get paid NOTHING eventually. Not to mention that every single union ever is full of crypto-commies that would rather sit and complain instead of working and earning their money. Middle class people are satisfied with their status and don't feel the need to destroy everything they've worked for

>the unions start with a demand and in the end they get about the half of what they demanded.
it's the usual, kind of like bargaining

Of course. But Americans don’t common with organized employees, so i needed to explain him about how this negotiations work.

millions upon millions of dollars poured into propoganda in the form of think-tanks and anti communist activism over decades

Attached: 1531793429097.jpg (912x768, 229K)

It will be harder to find a job with actively working unions

This.

Fuck unions, leftists, and socialism.

unions went to shit as it is
>extort employers
>extort employers
>extort employers

Unions are one of those things that are good in some amount but can get pretty bad if they are too successful. It's nice to give the workers some bargaining power but when unions wiggle into legislative backing and monopolize industries they drive productivity down and prices up. It's not just the employers that suffer as a result but the economy as a whole and consumers too.

It's a balancing act just like anything else. Same as you don't want corporate cartels to monopolize markets you don't want labour cartels to monopolize labour markets.

>extort employers
Yes, that's quite literally what unions do. Have you ever seen a heavily unionized industry at work?

>The Moroccan population of Marrakech is forced to live outside the city because real estate prices skyrocketed
welcome to being a tourist paradise

The employer's very property, his power, is based on extortion through state force
I have no problem with anyone "extorting" them

I didn't say I have a problem with it. Just that it's extortion pure and simple. You get what you want through threats. Whether your actions are morally right or wrong is completely arbitrary ans orthogonal to the nature of the action itself.

Calling property "extortion" is reaching quite a bit, however. The state has monopolized violence and by having property you outsource the need to protect your shit to them.

I'd argue that the state and the "private sector" aren't really divorced as we'd like to think: the state is justified by the existence of private property and landowners (and capitalists) need a state to mantain their private property. Which makes me think that statemen and landowners in fact have the same interests and are the same people

>I'd argue that the state and the "private sector" aren't really divorced as we'd like to think:
No shit moron. I literally just said that the state has monopolized violence. The state is simply the dominant protection racket in an area. It sells the goods of protection, arbitration and not breaking your fuckin legs if you pay them on time. In modern times they have grown to diversify and bloat substantially but their basic core function is unchanged because states that cannot fulfill it, fail.

States are inevitable for this reason. They occupy a niche in "the market" if you can call it that.

Because it's been quite a while since most of them ceased to be about protecting workers, and are now about filling their own pockets through any means possible?

THIS
basically we call them "Union bourgeois" these days

To add to my point, polish miners' unions (along with state owned mining&energy industry companies' Boards, that are huge moneymakers for any party that gets to rule) have been cockblocking ANY attempts at transforming that dying piece of shit of an industry, our energetic policies (upon which our national safety and welbeing depend), outrageously high social helpfor miners, their families and their hamsters for decades now. The results are that we pay highest prices for energy in Europe, we buy most expensive coal in Europe (because muh polish coal), pump fucking insane money into companies&miners that haven't even heard about profit in years, and we can't transform our energetic sector into anything remotely close to Green (in fact we are withdrawing most of these Green energy projects right now, while building NEW coal powerplants that cost shitload of money , won't make profit, all while losing last allowances on CO2 emission from EU).
And there's no way to change that. If any party would attempt to, parliament would burn, because angry miners mafia mobilizing their levies, and besides everyone in parliament wants those tasty boards' membership for himself, their uncle, cousin, so it's not in interest of anyone capable to change this.
One huge corrupted swamp. Wish this country got some sort of Margaret Thatcher to fix this mess through any means possible.