Vicodin withdrawl. Vicodin no prescription. Vicodin. House fox vicodin. Vicodin without a prescription….

http://catbirdseat.typepad.com/the_catbird_seat/2007/04/the_good_ol_day.html

It's kind of a chicken and egg type scenario. Which came first? Industry/jobs or the union? In this setting, it is easy to see that the union is more of a parasite on the economy, temporarily benefitting the union, while sucking away economic life from other areas.

They've passed laws protecting private property. They've premitted foreign investment in productive capacity; which means they are accepting the reality of the profit motive.

Your current economic reality in China today, particularly in large industrial cities, is such that there is actually some wealth to share, hence the possibility of rising wages for those workers who are participating. This is the stark difference between the bad ole' days and the improving days of current times.

I am not tied to this theory, it was just a proposition that rising wages in China is not necessarily an indication of anything, except rising wages, at this time. The track record of what is happening in China is relatively short. I am not ready to believe that China has embraced free market capitalism just yet.

Look at how many of our home grown intellectuals of the left wing still refuse to embrace free market capitalism. Why would we expect the ChiComs to do so?

And for all the reasons you stated and his previous experience with labour unions in the Soviet Union, my father refused to join one when he came to the United States. He is the only non-union worker in his organization.

If, as you suggest, the rise in wages is the result of government direction, we should have seen wages rising quickly from the Great Leap Forward to the late 1970s and slowing in recent years. The reality has been entirely the opposite. The rate of wage growth in China didn't begin to take off until the reforms leading to less government direction and more reliance on market forces.

Perhaps the rise in wages is the result of government direction as much as the result of market forces.

I would like to believe that you are correct, but somehow something inside me is still saying probably not.

Of course, while they pay lip service to that, I would say that their primary objective is to:

1. create a group of people who are tethered to and dependent on the union for their livelihood, which

2. consolidates power in the heads of the unions, which

3. provides political capital for those of a particular political party.

Just saying… If you look at it from the perspective that their mission is to increase wages, they have no impact. If you look at it from the perspective that their mission is to create dependency and deliver votes year after year to the Left, they seem to be very successful at that.

Look at what they do and not what they say.

Regards,
St Wendeler
Another Rovian Conspiracy