Dangerous Philosophies

The fact is that there are some philosophies that have very real and dangerous consequences. These philosophies fail because they ignore the essential characteristics of reality. In effect, people who follow these philosophies bury their head in the sand to the contradictions, denying causality of the unintended consequences. These failures are readily predictable for anyone with some linear thinking ability.

We are seeing these philosophies being played-out in the stimulus package and the Omnibus bill. They are being played out by injecting altruistic ideology into the legislative processes.

Government benevolence always backfires with unintended consequences. Authoritarian programs designed to make the economic system fair, have brought us to the brink of economic collapse. Just look at the “Community Reinvestment Act”, created to protect low income borrowers from discriminatory credit practices. This was the spark that ultimately led to the housing crash. How many Americans are being hurt by this crash?

While both Congress and the media rage a crusade to crucify corporate leaders for their corporate jets, hiring contractors to renovate posh office suites, and giving big bonuses to their executives. No mention is ever heard of Nancy Pelosi flying her family, friends, and personal employees around on military jets which she demands to be at her beck and call 24 hours a day.

What is also ignored is that these corporations, who buy their own jets, hire contractors to improve the aesthetics of their offices, and give out bonuses actually help to stimulate the economy. These practices are job friendly and that is what we need right now isn’t it?

Speaking of job friendliness, Barrack Obama signed a not so job-friendly executive order that discriminates against 84 Percent of the construction workforce. This new order basically calls for large-scale federal construction projects to be carried out by union labor eliminating over 80 percent of non-union contractors. When Clinton called for higher wages, benefits and collective-bargaining, for union contractors resulted in the costs nearly doubling. Of course it is the tax payers who absorb these higher costs.

Obama says he wants to create jobs but this policy does the exact opposite because 84% of American builders and contractors do not belong to unions. In every case union only contracts drive up costs by limiting bidders and forcing construction users to use union workers who represent less than 15 percent of the workforce.

“Union-only PLAs drive up costs for American taxpayers while unfairly discriminating against 84 percent of U.S. construction workers who choose not to join a labor union,” added Pickerel. “All taxpayers should have the opportunity to compete fairly on any project funded by the federal government.”

And how have Unions affected the auto industry?

"The unions for decades have been making steeper and steeper demands on the auto industry through efforts of strikes, a form of legalized extortion. Making demands that simply could never be lived up to in the long run. Pensions alone that the auto industry owes union members exceed $14 billion dollars - and that is to people who no longer produce anything for the companies. It is basically a system similar to how our social security system works, where the workers of today are supposed to provide for the workers of yesterday. Both are doomed for failure.

So now we have the US auto industry going to the United States government and asking for taxpayer dollars to bail out the costs associated with these union groups demands. It is another form of redistribution of wealth, where Americans are asked to pay money so that the unions can benefit.”

According to a Fortune magazine article “Behind Ford's scary $12.7 billion loss” organized labor has created a disadvantage to American auto makers trying to compete with non-unionized competitors. Not to mention the fact it increases the cost of the car.

“What’s more, not only is the union work force a terrible expense for the auto industry it’s just flat-out less productive than it’s non-union counterparts:

...nonunion U.S.-based auto assembly plants made 1.1 million more vehicles in 2005 than they did in 2001, while production at unionized plants fell by 1.1 million, he said.

Of course, one way to look at that statement is to say that the non-union automakers (Toyota, etc.) are just selling more cars than the union automakers. And that’s probably true, but it still proves the point that a union labor force is bad for business. Companies like Toyota are selling more cars because their cars are cheaper (thanks to lower labor costs) and better made (thanks to better workers). Both of those facts are an indictment of the union workers.

And it also exposes a larger truth. The more we foist costs like health insurance, high taxes and heavy regulation on American businesses the worse they’ll do in competing with their international counterparts. Something that will drive jobs and economic growth overseas.”

It is only common sense that states what is anti-business is anti-job.