Large projects are DELIBERATELY pushed over-budget to enrich unions.
1 2018-08-14 by Yuan_Anxiong
Take a look at the large-scale projects in any major city in the USA, for example NYC and SF, two of the most expensive ones. Giant building complexes, skyscrapers, transportation hubs and routes, etc, always go over-budget and are always delayed. Whom does this benefit? Union workers! They have a direct financial incentive to take as long as possible and be as wasteful as possible. These things should not take so long and cost so much to build!
27 comments
1 slapstellas 2018-08-14
I’d rather see unions benefiting then corporations
1 Yuan_Anxiong 2018-08-14
I'd rather see the public benefit than either. Those projects don't exist to give people jobs—they exist for the people who use them.
1 tiberius_regulus 2018-08-14
Unions are corporations.
1 slapstellas 2018-08-14
Atleast unions still use a democratic process and pay livable wages.
1 tiberius_regulus 2018-08-14
No they don't and democracy is mob rule. Have you ever even been in a union?
1 slapstellas 2018-08-14
55 an out isn’t a livable wage? And the United States started because of a mob rule
1 tiberius_regulus 2018-08-14
No. Further, "livable" is subjective.
No, it wasn't.
1 slapstellas 2018-08-14
So if you’re against labor workers having the right/power to come together and bargain for policies/wages that benefit them, then what do you suggest as a better alternative?
1 tiberius_regulus 2018-08-14
An actual free market.
1 slapstellas 2018-08-14
That’ll never happen in our lifetime so pick your poison. A decent wage & benefits or a corporate slave wage.
1 tiberius_regulus 2018-08-14
Not with your attitude!
This is merely a talking point. What is decent for you may not be decent for someone else. It's purely subjective. How are you not understanding this? Not to mention, cost of living is drastically different state by state, city by city. Stop using emotional talking points that "sound good" but are effectually meaningless.
1 slapstellas 2018-08-14
Do you understand that our own government has absolutely no say or power in regards to what happens within the financial sectors
1 tiberius_regulus 2018-08-14
The "government" could end the federal reserve tomorrow if it wanted to.
1 slapstellas 2018-08-14
I’m not so sure the government could end the federal reserve. Remember when JFK tried to in the 60’s? I don’t think it worked out so well. It’s only within the power of the people to end the federal reserve.
1 tiberius_regulus 2018-08-14
Sure they could. JFK didn't have the backing of Congress. Then there is the deep state. That's who whacked JFK. They are the one's above Congress but it's a fine line they walk. They don't want to reveal their actual existence and power.
1 slapstellas 2018-08-14
Interesting, I didn’t realize the president needed congress’s backing to pass an executive order. Referring to executive order 111100, which would of replaced federal reserve notes with silver certificates delegated by the treasury. Also, the deep state you’re referring too are all from the same secret society, that have placed members in ranking positions within all intelligence agencies, MIC, MSM, political office, the federal reserve, major US corporations, and much more. So no, the current state of government does not have to abilities to overthrow TPTB.
1 PinkoPrepper 2018-08-14
How is a market free if a few go into it wielding tremendous power, while most others go in desperate for a chance to feed themselves? Unions increase market freedom by reducing the ability of the elite to manipulate market imbalances.
1 tiberius_regulus 2018-08-14
I never said we did. I said a free market would solve the issues we face. We don't have one and haven't had one since the creation of the federal reserve.
No, they don't. They keep the status quo and even create unemployment. Employees lose their jobs while the union bosses profit and move on. Nice scheme, eh?
1 PinkoPrepper 2018-08-14
Buddy, if you've got a problem with bosses who profit and move on while employees lose their jobs, just wait till you lean about capitalism.
The market wasn't free before the federal reserve either. The whole meme of "free" markets is just a very successful bit of 1% propaganda.
1 tiberius_regulus 2018-08-14
Funny, jobs are voluntary but Unions are not in most cases. Buddy, I already know about Capitalism. Maybe it's you that doesn't know what it is? We certainly do not have it in the US.
The market wasn't free before central economic planning? Do enlighten us all on how it wasn't.
1 PinkoPrepper 2018-08-14
Besides the fact that, as of the founding of the fed, over half the us population was legally barred from full participation in the market? Markets historically are not free, because they are run for the benefit of the deadliest local gang. Sometimes that's a state, sometimes its the banking system, sometimes its just the local robber baron. The free/unfree distinction for markets does not rest on the backing of the dominant currency.
Yes, in most cases unions are not voluntary, because in most cases if you even think sideways about joining one you're fired on the spot. If you're concerned about agency/choice/liberty for workers on the job, and you think unions are the primary malefactor, you're delusional.
We don't have a free market BECAUSE we live under capitalism.
1 Yuan_Anxiong 2018-08-14
Get foreigners to do it more cheaply and quickly, perhaps.
1 garyp714 2018-08-14
weak unions, low membership = gilded age corporate / rich people nonsense.
Support your local unions.
1 Yuan_Anxiong 2018-08-14
Not if they put their own income before the project. That they don't really care when it gets done, how much it will cost, or how well it's done is enough for me to despise them.
1 ZiggyAnimals 2018-08-14
Walmart is that you?
1 TexasClass 2018-08-14
One can not discount the experience of the scheduler who uses numbers based upon past similar projects and then can be modified for specific purpose or to sell the project for N opening date. Then there is the weather delays and suppler delays. My favorite it Engineerin busts where the craft worker tries to build it according to the drawing and it won’t work. This can add a few days to a few weeks each time and can occur a few thousand times on a big project like a sky scraper or refinery.
Workers just work. The owners manage.
1 Yuan_Anxiong 2018-08-14
These dates and costs should always be overestimated even if it makes the investors less happy. I understand such things are hard to predict, but the public should only be met with happy surprises, not disappointing ones. If a project should take 4 years on paper, sandbag it and claim it will take 5, then when it takes 4.5 years you can say you finished half a year early.
1 tiberius_regulus 2018-08-14
No. Further, "livable" is subjective.
No, it wasn't.
1 tiberius_regulus 2018-08-14
An actual free market.
1 PinkoPrepper 2018-08-14
Besides the fact that, as of the founding of the fed, over half the us population was legally barred from full participation in the market? Markets historically are not free, because they are run for the benefit of the deadliest local gang. Sometimes that's a state, sometimes its the banking system, sometimes its just the local robber baron. The free/unfree distinction for markets does not rest on the backing of the dominant currency.
Yes, in most cases unions are not voluntary, because in most cases if you even think sideways about joining one you're fired on the spot. If you're concerned about agency/choice/liberty for workers on the job, and you think unions are the primary malefactor, you're delusional.
We don't have a free market BECAUSE we live under capitalism.
1 Yuan_Anxiong 2018-08-14
Get foreigners to do it more cheaply and quickly, perhaps.